Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
RANJAN SHARMA
Damini – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Ranjan Sharma, J.
Bail petitioner [Ms. Damini], being in custody since 29.05.2025 has come up before this Court, seeking bail, under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, (referred to as BNSS) originating from FIR No. 33 of 2025 dated 05.02.2025, registered at Police Station Nurpur, District Kangra [H.P.], under Section 21, 25 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (referred to as the NDPS Act).
FACTUAL MATRIX
2. Case set up by Mr. N.S.Chandel, Senior Advocate is that on 05.02.2025 a police party head by ASI Satender Singh received a secret information at about 10.25 a.m that two persons, namely, Raj Kumar and Roop Lal were sitting in a vehicle parked near Government Hospital, Nurpur on Defence Road behind the Ekant Hotel near Shiv temple. On receipt of this information, the Investigating Officer sent information under Section 42(2) of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act to SDPO, Nurpur, through Constable Lekh Raj. The Investigating Officer associated independent witnesses Khushal Singh and Ajay Kumar and reached the spot and found the vehicle being registration No. HP-01K-5700 parked near Kali Mata Mandir and found Roop Lal
Bail granted in NDPS commercial quantity case: no recovery from petitioner, co-accused confession inadmissible, no prima facie guilt under Sec 37, prolonged 10-month incarceration with trial delay vi....
Prolonged incarceration without trial violates the right to personal liberty under Article 21, necessitating the grant of bail even under stringent provisions like the NDPS Act if no reasonable groun....
Bail can be granted even under stringent laws like the NDPS Act when prolonged incarceration occurs without trial, emphasizing personal liberty and the presumption of innocence.
Bail is granted when no prima facie case exists against the accused, emphasizing the right to personal liberty under Article 21, especially during prolonged incarceration and delay in trial.
Prolonged incarceration and lack of evidence necessitate bail, emphasizing personal liberty and the right to a speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution.
Prolonged detention without trial undermines personal liberty; bail is favored, especially when evidence against the accused is weak and trial delays are significant.
Prolonged incarceration without trial infringes the fundamental right to personal liberty under Article 21, requiring bail to be granted in cases of no substantive evidence against the accused and ex....
The court reinforced that bail serves to protect an individual's personal liberty, particularly when prolonged detention without trial raises constitutional concerns under Article 21, emphasizing the....
Prolonged pre-trial detention without a clear and prima facie case warrants bail under the NDPS Act, emphasizing the right to personal liberty.
Under prolonged detention circumstances, bail should be granted if no reasonable grounds exist to believe in the guilt of the accused, respecting Article 21 rights.
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
