Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KAINTHLA
Ajay 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. 55 of 2023 dated 04.04.2023 registered at Police Station Kangra, District Kangra for the commission of an offence punishable under Section 20 read with Section 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (in short ND&PS Act). As per the prosecution, the petitioner was found in possession of 1.530 kgs of charas. The petitioner has been behind the bars for the last 21 months. The matter is listed for prosecution evidence. His right to a speedy trial is being violated. 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 was on patrolling duty on 03.04.2023 when a secret information was received that two persons were moving around New Model Senior Secondary School, New Kangra, who were intending to sell the charas. The information was reduced into writing. The police completed the formalities and reached Botua at about 9:10 pm with the witnesses where two persons were
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.
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.
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.
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.
In NDPS commercial quantity cases, bail requires strict satisfaction of Section 37 twin conditions: reasonable grounds believing not guilty and no reoffending risk. Prolonged detention, trial delays ....
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
