Back
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU
RAJNESH OSWAL
Mathupotra Sohil – Appellant
Versus
Narcotic Control Bureau, Jammu – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
RAJNESH OSWAL, J.
CRM(M) No. 999/2025
1. The petitioner has filed CRM(M) No. 999/2025 for quashing of the order dated 07.08.2025 passed by the learned Principal Sessions Judge (Special Court under NDPS Act), Samba (for short 'the Trial Court'), whereby he has been charged along with others, for commission of offences punishable under Sections 8/20/25/27-A/29 of the NDPS Act. Simultaneously, the petitioner has filed an application for grant of bail bearing Bail App No. 261/2025. Both these petitions are being disposed of by this common judgment.
2. The petitioner has impugned the order dated 07.08.2025 primarily on the ground that the learned Trial Court has relied heavily on confessional statements recorded under Section 67 of the NDPS Act, which are inadmissible in evidence for the purpose of framing charges. Furthermore, the complaint filed by the respondent lacks specific allegations or material evidence against the petitioner. The respondent has failed to attribute any active role to the petitioner regarding the procurement, concealment, transportation, or financing of the alleged contraband and his inclusion as an accused is based solely on his association with the co-a
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.
The admissibility of evidence, including confessional statements, and the application of Section 37 of the NDPS Act for bail, were central legal points established in the judgment.
The presumption of conscious possession applies in drug cases, necessitating the petitioner to disprove involvement in the crime to grant bail under the NDPS Act.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the stringent conditions for granting bail under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, especially for offences involving commercial quantity of contraband su....
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....
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....
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....
Point of Law : NDPS Act – Search and seizer of charas – Grant of Bail - Petitioner has already suffered more than 11 months of incarceration which amounts to pretrial detention.
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
