Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
VIRENDER SINGH
Gurpreet Singh @ Lucky – Appellant
Versus
State of H.P – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. applicant seeks bail claiming innocence, no recovery, parity, illegal arrest (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 2. prosecution opposes bail on circumstantial evidence (Para 11) |
| 3. section 37 ndps requires strict twin conditions (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 4. bail denied for commercial quantity ndps offence (Para 21 , 22) |
JUDGMENT :
Virender Singh, J.
Applicant-Gurpreet Singh @ Lucky, has filed the present application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘BNSS’), for releasing him, on bail, during the pendency of the trial, arising out of FIR No.52 of 2025, dated 07.03.2025, registered under Sections 20, 25 & 29 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘NDPS Act’), with Police Station, Nurpur, District Kangra, H.P.
2. According to the applicant, he is innocent person and has falsely been implicated, in this case.
3. Investigation, in the present case, is stated to be completed and the applicant is in judicial custody. All these facts have been pleaded to demonstrate that the custodial interrogation of the applicant, is no longer required by
In NDPS commercial quantity cases, bail requires court findings beyond prima facie that accused not guilty and unlikely to reoffend; direct recovery presence and CDR evidence preclude such satisfacti....
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.
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 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 NDPS commercial quantity cases, bail granted where accused involvement relies solely on co-accused's custodial disclosure statement, inadmissible under evidence law, satisfying Section 37 twin con....
Bail under NDPS Act requires dual satisfaction of not guilty and no risk of re-offending, which the applicant failed to prove.
The need for substantial probable causes for believing that the accused is not guilty of the alleged offence and the deleterious impact of narcotic drugs on society.
Bail in NDPS commercial quantity cases requires mandatory satisfaction of twin conditions under Section 37: reasonable grounds believing not guilty and unlikely to reoffend; beyond prima facie, negat....
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....
Commercial quantity NDPS bail mandates Section 37 twin conditions: reasonable grounds believing non-guilt and no reoffence likelihood on bail; procedural lapses insufficient for release.
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
