Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Mr Justice Rakesh Kainthla, J
Amar Nath – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Rakesh Kainthla, J.)
Since all the bail petitions arise out of the same F.I.R.; therefore, these are taken up together for disposal by way of a common judgment.
2. The petitioners have filed the present petitions for seeking regular bail. It has been asserted that F.I.R. No. 15 of 2025, dated 08.02.2025, was registered at Police Station Chowari, District Chamba, H.P., for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 20 , 25 and 29 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (for short ‘NDPS Act’) against the petitioners. The petitioners have been falsely implicated. There is nothing to connect the petitioners with the commission of a crime. The petitioners are the permanent residents of District Chamba, H.P., and they have roots in the society. The custody of the petitioners is not required, and they would abide by all the terms and conditions, which the Court may impose. Hence, the petitions.
3. The petitions are opposed by filing status reports asserting that the police party had set up a Nakka at Tunnuhatti on 08.02.2025, and they were checking the vehicles. A Pick-up bearing registration No. HP73A-6721 came from Bannikhet towards the police at 12:10 a.m. T
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 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 presumption of conscious possession applies in drug cases, necessitating the petitioner to disprove involvement in the crime to grant bail under the NDPS Act.
Bail – No person accused of an offence involving trade in a commercial quantity of narcotics is liable to be released on bail.
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 ....
The presence of criminal antecedents significantly influences bail decisions, emphasizing the need to protect society from habitual offenders.
The court emphasized that under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, bail can only be granted if there are reasonable grounds to believe the accused is not guilty and unlikely to commit further offences.
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
