Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KAINTHLA
Rakesh Kumar – 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 FIR No. 88 of 2023 dated 10.12.2023 registered at Police Station Kihar, District Chamba, H.P., for the commission of an offence punishable under Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (in short ND&PS Act). As per the prosecution, the police were present at Haluri Chowk, Kihar on 10.12.2023 for a routine traffic check. The police apprehended thepetitioner at 1:55 pm on suspicion. Police checked the petitioner’s carry bag and recovered 1.180 kgs of charas from it. The petitioner is in custody for one year. The prosecution has examined 4 witnesses out of 24 cited by it. The delay in concluding the trial is not attributable to the petitioner. The independent witnesses have not supported the prosecution's case. The police have filed the charge sheet, and no recovery is to be effected from the petitioner. Therefore, it was prayed that the present petition be allowed and the petitioner be released on bail.
2. The petition is opposed by filing a status report asserting that the police party was on a patrolli
The court emphasized that under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, bail cannot be granted unless there are reasonable grounds to believe the accused is not guilty and unlikely to commit further offences.
Bail under the NDPS Act requires satisfaction of twin conditions: the accused must not be guilty and not likely to commit further offences while on bail.
The court emphasized that under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, bail cannot be granted unless there are reasonable grounds to believe the accused is not guilty and unlikely to commit further offences.
The court emphasized that bail under the NDPS Act requires satisfaction of stringent conditions, particularly in cases involving commercial quantities of narcotics.
In NDPS cases involving commercial quantity, strict satisfaction of Section 37 twin conditions mandatory for bail; trial delay or incarceration alone insufficient grounds.
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.
Bail denied under NDPS Section 37 for commercial quantity as petitioner accompanying contraband bearer fled police sans explanation, failing twin conditions of reasonable belief in non-guilt and no r....
The court ruled that bail cannot be granted under Section 37 of the NDPS Act unless conditions of proving innocence and minimal risk of reoffending are met, regardless of trial delays.
Bail denied in NDPS commercial quantity case as vehicle occupants prima facie in conscious possession of contraband; twin conditions under Section 37 not satisfied despite trial delay.
For bail in NDPS Act cases involving commercial quantity, the accused must establish reasonable grounds of innocence and lack of likelihood to commit further offenses, per Section 37.
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
