Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
VIRENDER SINGH
Samina @ Sameena @ Gulfasa – Appellant
Versus
State of H.P. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. innocence, completed probe justify interim bail. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 2. secret tip-off enables heroin recovery raid. (Para 9) |
| 3. ndps section 37 mandates twin conditions. (Para 10) |
| 4. custodial confessions inadmissible post-tofan singh. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 5. cdrs lack substantive conversation evidence. (Para 15 , 16) |
| 6. no finances, priors, parity favor release. (Para 17 , 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 7. prima facie not guilty; unlikely reoffend. (Para 18 , 22) |
| 8. bail granted with bonds and conditions. (Para 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29) |
Judgment :
Virender Singh, J.
Applicant Samina @ Sameena @ Gulfasa has filed the present application, under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (hereinafter referred to as ‘the BNSS’) for releasing him, on bail, during the pendency of the trial, arising out of FIR No. 38 of 2025, dated 22.2.2025, registered under Sections 21, 27-A and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘NDPS’ Act), with Police Station, Puruwala, District Sirmour, H.P.
2. The applicant has pleaded the fact that she is innocent person and has falsely been implicated, in the present case, at the
In NDPS commercial quantity bail, confessional statements to police inadmissible; CDRs' evidentiary value at trial. Absence of financial links, reliance on shelter allegation insufficient for prima f....
Bail granted in commercial quantity NDPS case where evidence solely from inadmissible co-accused police confessions and CDRs (trial-stage evaluation), no financial links, investigation complete, pari....
Bail granted in NDPS commercial quantity case as co-accused police custody statements inadmissible for conviction, CDRs' value for trial; Section 37 twin conditions satisfied via parity, lack of fina....
The court emphasized that mere allegations and statements from co-accused do not suffice for denying bail; there must be substantial evidence establishing a prima facie case.
In commercial quantity NDPS cases, co-accused confessional statements to police inadmissible; CDRs' evidentiary value for trial; bail granted where prima facie not guilty based on weak links, parity,....
Bail granted in NDPS commercial quantity case where proprietor absent from raid site, linked only by inadmissible co-accused custody statement and expired rent agreement, satisfying Section 37 condit....
The court ruled that statements made under police influence are inadmissible against co-accused in NDPS cases, allowing bail due to lack of prima facie evidence.
The court ruled that involvement of an accused must be substantiated by adequate evidence, and statements by co-accused cannot solely establish guilt under the NDPS Act.
Statements of co-accused are inadmissible without corroboration, and mere association does not establish a prima facie case for bail denial under the NDPS Act.
The court ruled that reliance on inadmissible co-accused statements cannot sustain a conviction, leading to the grant of bail under the NDPS Act.
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
