Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
RAKESH KAINTHLA
Naveen Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
The petitioner has filed the present petition for seeking regular bail in F.I.R. No.10 of 2025 dated 29.03.2025, registered for the commission of an offence punishable under Section 18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (in short ‘NDPS Act’) at Police Station Khairi, District Chamba, H.P.
2. It has been asserted that, as per the prosecution, the police had set up a nakka on 29.03.2025. They saw the petitioner carrying a backpack at about 11.25 PM. The petitioner got frightened after seeing the police and started walking with fast speed. The police apprehended the petitioner and, on search, recovered 86 grams of opium from the backpack. The police arrested the petitioner and seized the opium. As per the result of the analysis, the sample was found to contain morphine, codeine, thebaine, papaverine, narcotine and meconic acid. The percentage of morphine in the exhibit was found to be 2.04% w/w. The police have filed the charge sheet before the Court. The petitioner had earlier filed Cr.MP(M) No. 1388 of 2025 and Cr.MP(M) No. 219 of 2025, which were dismissed vide orders dated 26.11.2025 and 21.07.2025. The prosecution has failed to comp
Prolonged trial delay in NDPS intermediate quantity case violates speedy trial right under Article 21, constituting change in circumstances for successive bail despite prior rejections and antecedent....
Successive NDPS bail granted despite prior dismissal due to over one-year pre-trial detention violating speedy trial right under Article 21, intermediate quantity, and despite antecedents.
Successive bail in NDPS intermediate quantity case granted due to Article 21 speedy trial violation from long incarceration and trial delay, despite prior rejection and antecedents.
Prolonged incarceration and trial delay in NDPS case with intermediate quantity constitute change in circumstances for successive bail, enforcing speedy trial right under Article 21 despite prior rej....
In NDPS cases with intermediate contraband quantity, over one-year incarceration and trial delay violate Article 21 speedy trial right, entitling bail despite antecedents as State cannot oppose on cr....
Successive NDPS bail applications allowed on change in circumstances like trial delay infringing speedy trial right under Article 21, overriding offence seriousness and antecedents for grant of bail.
Inordinate delay in POCSO trial constitutes material change for successive bail application, overriding offence gravity; speedy trial right under Article 21 mandates release from prolonged undertrial....
The right to a speedy trial is fundamental, and prolonged detention without trial justifies bail, even with prior convictions.
Prolonged pre-trial detention without expeditious trial violates Article 21, entitling accused to bail despite prior rejection, if material trial delays or changed circumstances exist.
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
