Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
Mr. Justice Virender Singh, J
Naisha Arora – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Virender Singh, J.
By way of the present application, filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘BNSS’), applicant-Naisha Arora has sought her release, on bail, during the pendency of the trial, in case FIR No.201 of 2024, dated 24.11.2024, registered under Sections 21, 29-61-85 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘NDPS Act’), with Police Station Kangra, District Kangra, H.P.
2. According to the applicant, she has falsely been implicated, in the present case and has been arrested by the police with allegedly possessing 5.30 gms of chitta/heroin and she has termed the case as false and connected one.
3. As per applicant, the investigation is complete and according to her, no useful purpose would be served by keeping her in the judicial custody, that too, for the indefinite period.
4. According to the applicant, she had earlier tried her luck by moving similar application, before the Court of learned Special Judge-I, Kangra at Dharamshala, District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh. However, the same was dismissed vide order dated 20.12.2024.
5. Apart from this, Mr. Jeevan Kumar, Adv
The court ruled that the applicant is entitled to bail as the quantity of contraband does not meet the threshold for commercial quantity, and pre-trial punishment is prohibited.
Bail can be granted to women under NDPS provisions when charges do not involve commercial quantities and sufficient conditions are set to ensure judicial process integrity.
The court ruled that the applicant is entitled to bail as the contraband does not constitute commercial quantity, and pre-trial punishment is prohibited.
The presumption of innocence applies in bail applications, and previous unconvicted offenses do not automatically justify denial of bail.
The absence of 'commercial quantity' in drug possession negates the application of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, allowing for bail and preserving the presumption of innocence.
The presumption of innocence remains until conviction, and bail may be granted based on parity with co-accused and absence of commercial quantity of contraband.
The court allowed bail for applicants, ruling that the alleged amount of contraband did not meet the definition of 'commercial quantity', and emphasized the presumption of innocence and potential adv....
The court granted bail to young applicants under the NDPS Act, emphasizing their innocence, the absence of prior cases, and the completion of investigation, while imposing conditions to ensure compli....
Pre-trial punishment is prohibited, and the presumption of innocence remains until proven guilty, allowing bail when investigation is complete and no prior cases exist.
The court held that the applicant is entitled to bail as the quantity of contraband does not constitute commercial quantity, thus Section 37 of the NDPS Act is inapplicable, and the presumption of in....
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
