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

2005 Supreme(P&H) 1000

AMAR DUTT, RAJIVE BHALLA, KIRAN ANAND LALL
Tule Ram – Appellant
Versus
State Of Haryana – Respondent


Judgment

Amar Dutt, J.

1. On December 16, 2004, after bail had already been granted to the appellant Tule Ram, a Division of this Court had observed as under :-

"Bail has already been granted in this case. However, we have also perused the data provided with regard to the pendency or disposal of appeals under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act. Copies of this data be supplied forthwith to Mr. Pardeep Singh and Mr. Sanjeev Sheokand personally, so that if possible, some principles can be laid down with regard to the grant or refusal of bail under the Narcotic Act as the pendency of appeals is rather prolonged. Adjourned to 7.5.2005".

While examining this question on May 9, 2005, the Bench dealing with the case was of the view that before discussing the issue raised in the order dated December 16, 2004 the Court would be required to go into the question as to what was the extent of the power for suspension of sentence which could be exercised by the High Court while dealing with the applications for suspension of sentence in appeals under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as "the NDPS Act") that were pending before this Co



























































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