Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
RAKESH KAINTHLA
Ankit Choudhary – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. charas recovery linked to petitioner via co-accused statement, payments. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. petitioner claims false implication; prosecution invokes ndps section 37. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. bail principles: nature of offence, evidence, antecedents considered. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 4. co-accused police confessions inadmissible under bsa section 23. (Para 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 5. prior hp cases grant bail on weak confessional evidence. (Para 14 , 15) |
| 6. financial transactions insufficient to prove ndps involvement. (Para 16 , 17) |
| 7. arrest grounds communication applies prospectively per supreme court. (Para 18 , 19) |
| 8. petitioner satisfies ndps section 37 twin conditions. (Para 20) |
| 9. bail granted with conditions; limited to bail disposal. (Para 21 , 22 , 23 , 24) |
JUDGMENT :
Rakesh Kainthla, J.
The petitioner has filed the present petition for seeking regular bail in F.I.R. No. 129 of 2025, dated 06.10.2025, registered for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 20, 25 and 29 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (for short ‘NDPS’) at Police Station Jawali, District Kangra, H.P.
2. It has been asserted that, as per the prosecution, the police received secret informatio
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....
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.
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 disclosure statements inadmissible under Evidence Act for NDPS bail denial; call records and CCTV vehicle association insufficient for prima facie case or Section 37 rigour post charge-she....
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....
Financial transactions alone do not establish guilt in drug-related offences; co-accused statements are inadmissible unless corroborated by other evidence.
Bail should not be denied based on inadmissible evidence; the evaluation of admissible evidence is paramount in bail considerations.
In NDPS commercial quantity cases, co-accused confessional statements inadmissible against petitioner; call detail records alone insufficient for Section 37 twin conditions; bail on parity where co-a....
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....
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
