SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1991 Supreme(Mad) 423

PRATAP SINGH
Seemairaj and Others – Appellant
Versus
Assistant Collector of Central Excise – Respondent


Appearing Advocates:T. Sudanthiram, P. Rajamanickam, Advocates.

Judgment :-

Petition under S. 167(2)(a)(ii) and under S. 439 of Criminal Procedure Code for bail.

2. For possession of 30 kilograms of ganja which is an offence punishable under S. 20(b) of N.D.P.S. Act, the petitioner was arrested on 3-4-91. Since then he is in jail. More than 60 days have passed and till now complaint has not been filed. Hence the petitioner prays that he should be released under S. 167(2) Criminal Procedure Code.

3. Mr. T. Sudanthiram, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners contended that the petitioners were arrested on 3-4-91 for offence punishable under S. 20(b) of N.D.P.S. Act for alleged possession of 30 kilograms of ganja that more then 60 days have passed and charge-sheet was not yet laid and hence under S. 167(2)(a)(ii) Criminal Procedure Code, the petitioners are entitled to bail.

4. Per contra, Mr. M. P. Rajamanickam, the learned Public Prosecutor, contended that petitioners have no absolute right to get bail under S. 167(2)(ii) Criminal Procedure Code, in this case since the petitioners were allegedly in possession of 30 kilograms of ganja and hence are liable to be punished under S. 20(b) of N.D.P.S. Act and the punishment is rigorous impriso





































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top