Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIRENDER SINGH
Sahil Goswami – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Virender Singh, J.
This order of mine shall dispose of the above-titled bail applications, which have been filed by the applicants, under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘ BNSS ’), for releasing them, on bail, during the pendency of trial, in case FIR No.125 of 2023, dated 15.09.2023 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘FIR, in question’), registered under Sections 22 , 25, 29 of the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (hereinafter referred to as ‘the NDPS Act’) and Sections 201 , 465, 467 and 471 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE (hereinafter referred to as the ‘IPC’), with Police Station, Gagret, District Una, H.P.
2. According to the applicants, they have falsely been implicated in the present case and after registration of the FIR, police has completed the investigation and filed the charge-sheet. However, charges have not yet been framed, in this case.
3. As per applicants, there are about 80 prosecution witnesses, in this case and the conclusion of the trial, against them, will take sufficient long time and as such, no useful purpose would be served, by keeping them in the judicial custody, that too, for the in
The court emphasized stringent conditions under the NDPS Act for bail, requiring mandatory findings for release, particularly focusing on community safety and procedural compliance.
The court emphasized that under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, bail cannot be granted unless there are reasonable grounds for believing the accused is not guilty and unlikely to commit further offences.
Admissibility of evidence, commercial quantity of contraband, and likelihood of the applicant to commit similar offences while on bail.
The provisions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act are mandatory, requiring the court to find reasonable grounds that the accused is not guilty and unlikely to offend again for bail to be granted.
Corroborative evidence alone is insufficient for conviction under NDPS Act, necessitating substantial direct evidence; bail granted due to lengthy custody without conclusive evidence.
The court held that confession statements under the NDPS Act require corroborative evidence, and prolonged pre-trial detention with no contraband recovery justifies granting bail.
The court emphasized the importance of compliance with procedural safeguards in drug-related cases, granting bail due to significant delays and procedural lapses.
In NDPS commercial quantity cases, bail denied absent satisfaction of twin Section 37 conditions: reasonable grounds (substantial probable causes) for non-guilt and no likelihood of reoffending; fina....
Point of Law : Before the Court grants bail to an accused allegedly involved in an offence under the NDPS Act, the Court required to be satisfied that the accused is not guilty of the offence and tha....
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
