Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Mr Justice Rakesh Kainthla, J
Lalit Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Rakesh Kainthla, J.)
The petitioner has filed the present petition for seeking regular bail. It has been asserted that the petitioner was arrested vide F.I.R. No. 17 of 2025, dated 30.01.2025, registered for the commission of an offence punishable under Sections 20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (in short ‘NDPS Act’) at Police Station Dhalli, District Shimla, H.P. The petitioner was falsely implicated. The police failed to comply with the mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act. The investigation is complete. No recovery is to be effected from the petitioner. The petitioner would abide by all the terms and conditions, which the Court may impose. Hence, the petition.
2. The petition is opposed by filing a status report asserting that the police party had set up a Nakka near HRTC Petrol Pump Dhalli, Shimla, on 30.01.2025 at 2:30 p.m. A motorcycle bearing registration No. HP63-A-8878 came to the spot. The motorcycle rider had a backpack. The police signalled the motorcycle rider to stop and asked him about the backpack. He could not give any satisfactory answer regarding the backpack. The police searched the backpack in the presence of two independent witn
The court established that the rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act do not apply for intermediate quantities, allowing bail based on the absence of criminal antecedents and reasonable conditions to ....
The court established that pre-trial detention is unjustified when the accused can be secured by bail, especially in the absence of substantial evidence.
The court established that bail should not be denied indefinitely, emphasizing reasonable conditions to ensure justice and the accused's presence during trial.
The court ruled that the rigours of Section 37 of the ND&PS Act do not apply as the quantity of heroin is less than commercial, allowing bail with conditions.
The court emphasized that the parameters for granting bail include the nature of accusations, gravity of the offence, and the accused's societal ties, allowing bail when evidence is insufficient.
The court established that the parameters for granting bail must ensure the accused's presence during trial, emphasizing the need for reasonable conditions and the concept of conscious possession in ....
Co-accused statements are inadmissible as evidence, and absence of reasonable grounds for belief in the accused's involvement satisfies bail conditions.
The court ruled that insufficient evidence existed to attribute a commercial quantity of opium to the petitioner, allowing bail despite serious charges under the NDPS Act.
The court ruled that bail is not a matter of right, especially for drug-related offences, and emphasized the importance of considering the accused's criminal antecedents and potential for re-offendin....
The court established that statements made by co-accused are inadmissible as evidence and cannot justify detention, leading to the granting of bail.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
