Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
RAKESH KAINTHLA
Shabnam – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. accusation based on financial transactions linking to drug trade. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. defense claims innocence; petition opposed due to involvement allegations. (Para 3 , 6) |
| 3. court weighs evidence against bail considerations and definitions. (Para 8 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 4. conditions for bail set while highlighting the need to protect legal proceedings. (Para 15 , 16) |
JUDGMENT :
RAKESH KAINTHLA, J.
The petitioner has filed the present petition for seeking regular bail in F.I.R. No. 127 of 2024, dated 27.10.2024, registered at Police Station, Damtal, District Kangra, H.P., for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 21 , 27A and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act).
2. It has been asserted that, as per the prosecution, the police apprehended Kamaljeet on 27.10.2024 at about 7:00 pm with 262 grams of heroin. Kamaljeet revealed that he had purchased heroin from Rajesh Lodhi. The police arrested Rajesh Kumar, who disclosed that one Vishal Kumar alias Shalubaliresident of Dubai, used to send heroin to him. He (Rajesh Kumar) would collect money and hand it over to Raj Kumar @ Sethi, who used to hand over the money to Lakhvinder. The
The court determined that financial transactions alone do not establish involvement in drug trafficking, necessitating prima facie evidence for bail denial.
Receiving drug sale proceeds and depositing them does not prima facie constitute financing under NDPS Section 27A or abetment under Section 29 absent evidence of providing sustaining funds or instiga....
Receipt of drug sale proceeds does not prima facie constitute financing under NDPS Section 27A or abetment under Section 29 absent instigation or sustaining illicit traffic, justifying bail despite c....
Financial transactions and call detail records alone insufficient for prima facie NDPS involvement or financing under Section 27A; mere drug purchase not financing. Bail granted despite prior offence....
The burden of proof lies on the petitioners to show innocence in narcotics cases; possession of drugs and financial transactions create a prima facie case against bail eligibility.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that bail is the rule and refusal is the exception, and that deprivation of liberty before conviction has a substantial punitive content. The court....
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
