Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
RAKESH KAINTHLA
Amar Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Rakesh Kainthla, J.
The petitioner has filed the present petition for seeking regular bail in FIR No. 112 of 2024, dated 25.09.2024, registered at Police Station Palampur, District Kangra, H.P., for the commission of an offence punishable under Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act.
2. It has been asserted that the petitioner was arrested on 25.09.2024. The prosecution’s case is false and is based upon an absurd, baseless and imaginary story. As per the prosecution, 1 kg 374 grams of charas was recovered by the police. The petitioner has no role in the commission of crime. There are no reasonable grounds to believe that the petitioner has committed the offence. Therefore, it was prayed that the present petition be allowed and the petitioner be released on bail.
3. The petition is opposed by filing a status report asserting that the police were on patrolling duty on 25.09.2024. They had set up naka at Chadiyar Chowk at 12:30 am. A vehicle bearing registration No. HP66-3489 was intercepted by the police at 3:40 am. The driver identified himself as Amar Singh (the present petitioner), and the person sitting in the front seat identified himself
Bail under NDPS Act requires proof of innocence and no likelihood of re-offending, especially for commercial quantities.
The court emphasized that bail is not an automatic right, especially in drug offenses, considering the applicant's criminal history and the need to protect societal order.
Bail applications must disclose prior criminal history, with courts assessing the risk of re-offending and societal safety when considering bail requests.
In NDPS commercial quantity cases, vehicle passengers prima facie in conscious possession of recovered contraband; bail denied absent satisfaction of Section 37 twin conditions: not guilty and unlike....
Bail in NDPS commercial quantity cases denied unless twin conditions under Section 37 satisfied: reasonable grounds believing accused not guilty and unlikely to commit offence on bail; red-handed arr....
In NDPS commercial quantity cases, bail requires court satisfaction of twin conditions under Section 37: reasonable grounds accused not guilty and unlikely to reoffend; co-accused confessional statem....
Bail denied in commercial quantity NDPS case as twin conditions under Section 37 unsatisfied: reasonable grounds exist to believe petitioner guilty of conscious possession and likely to reoffend, sup....
Bail denied in NDPS commercial quantity case as accused failed twin conditions of Section 37: no reasonable grounds to believe not guilty given prima facie conscious possession via concealment attemp....
Vehicle occupants prima facie in conscious possession of commercial quantity contraband absent explanation; bail refused as twin conditions under Section 37 not satisfied: no reasonable grounds for b....
Bail denied under NDPS Section 37 for commercial quantity as petitioner accompanying contraband bearer fled police sans explanation, failing twin conditions of reasonable belief in non-guilt and no r....
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
