Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
RAKESH KAINTHLA
Tej Pratap Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. ndps fir: drug recovery from co-accused implicating petitioner. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments: false implication versus criminal antecedents risk. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. bail parameters from supreme court precedents. (Para 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 4. co-accused confessions inadmissible under bsa section 23. (Para 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 5. cdr and financial links insufficient for ndps custody. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 6. bail granted subject to conditions; observations limited. (Para 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22) |
Judgment :
Rakesh Kainthla, J.
The petitioner has filed the present petition for seeking regular bail in F.I.R. No. 28 of 2024, dated 21.02.2024, registered for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 21,22 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (ND&PS Act) at Police Station Nahan, District Sirmour, H.P.
2. It has been asserted that, as per the prosecution, the police intercepted a vehicle bearing registration no HR-12Y- 8814 being driven by Roshan Lal alias Vikky Don, and recovered 960 capsules bearing the mark Parivon Spas Plus containing Tramadol and one polythene containing 22.92 grams of heroin. The police seized the heroin and capsules and arrested R
In NDPS cases, co-accused confessional statements to police, call detail records, and financial transactions alone insufficient for prima facie case denying regular bail; further detention unjustifie....
In NDPS commercial quantity cases, co-accused confessional statements (inadmissible under Evidence Act Section 25 & CrPC 162) and financial transactions alone insufficient to deny bail under Section ....
Co-accused statements inadmissible in NDPS bail; call records, financial transactions and mobile photos insufficient alone to establish prima facie case or satisfy Section 37 rigours absent direct re....
Bail should not be denied based on inadmissible evidence; the evaluation of admissible evidence is paramount in bail considerations.
Co-accused's confessional statement to police inadmissible against petitioner; financial transactions insufficient for prima facie nexus in commercial quantity NDPS case, satisfying Section 37 twin c....
Co-accused disclosure statement and call detail records alone insufficient to deny regular bail in NDPS case involving commercial quantity, as statement inadmissible and no prima facie case establish....
Financial transactions alone do not establish guilt in drug-related offences; co-accused statements are inadmissible unless corroborated by other evidence.
The court emphasized that bail should be granted when there is insufficient evidence connecting the accused to the crime, particularly when co-accused confessions are inadmissible.
The court ruled that co-accused statements are inadmissible evidence, and insufficient evidence exists to justify continued detention, leading to bail being granted with specific conditions.
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
