IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIPIN CHANDER NEGI
Anil Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Bipin Chander Negi, J.
The bail petitions, in the case at hand, are being taken up together, as they are arising out from the same FIR. The present bail petitions have been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) for grant of regular bail. The same arises out of FIR No.17/24, dated 17.10.2024, registered at Police Station Bagga, District Solan, Himachal Pradesh, under Sections 15, 18, 20 and 29 of NDPS Act.
2. Heard counsel for the parties. Perused the status report. Copy whereof, has also been supplied to learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners.
3. The brief facts giving rising to the present case are that the police on a tip, had stopped a Maruti Wagnor Car (red colour) bearing Registration No.HP-24D-5368. On stopping the car, the police on enquiry found out that the vehicle was owned by one Anil Kumar, who was driving the vehicle. Along with Anil Kumar, one individual namely Manohar Lal, was seating adjacent to the driver’s seat. On checking the vehicle, 19.48 grams opium was found from the dashboard of the Vehicle.
4. Other than the aforesaid, from the dashboard of the vehicle 53.6 grams of charas were also recovered. Beside
Bail is granted based on the presumption of innocence, lack of flight risk, and the need to avoid prejudicial pre-trial incarceration.
Personal liberty is a fundamental right that should only be curtailed when necessary, and bail should secure attendance at trial without being punitive.
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 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....
Co-accused's police custody disclosures inadmissible against applicant in NDPS cases; mere call detail records between co-villagers insufficient to deny bail; parity with released co-accused entitles....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the presumption of innocence, the need to secure the accused's appearance at trial, and the larger interests of the public or the State influenc....
Compliance with Section 52-A of the NDPS Act is essential for evidence validity; prolonged judicial custody without trial examination raises constitutional concerns, allowing bail despite stringent N....
Personal liberty is a fundamental right; bail is granted to ensure attendance at trial, not as a punitive measure.
The court established that in cases involving the NDPS Act, the quantity of contraband, duration of custody, and absence of pending investigations are significant factors in determining bail eligibil....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.