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

2022 Supreme(P&H) 106

ANOOP CHITKARA
Joginder @ Joga – Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Aakash Juneja, Advocate
For the Respondent: Mr. Rajat Gautam, DAG

JUDGMENT :

Anoop Chitkara, J.

FIR No.

Dated

Police Station

Sections

869

14.12.2021

City Rohtak, Rohtak

21 of NDPS Act

1. The petitioner under arrest for violating the provisions as mentioned above of Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act), per the FIR captioned above, has come up before this Court under Section 439 CrPC seeking bail on the ground that the quantity of contraband is less than commercial and rigours of S. 37 of NDPS Act do not apply.

2. As per bail application and the response of the State, the petitioner has following criminal history :

Sr. No.

FIR No.

Date

Offences

Police Station

1.

322

01.06.2018

NDPS Act

City Rohtak

2.

826

17.11.2022

NDPS Act

City Rohtak

3. Ld. Counsel for the petitioner contends that the pre-trial incarceration would cause an irreversible injustice to the petitioner and family.

4. Ld. counsel appearing for State opposes because the petitioner has criminal antecedents and submits that grant of bail encourages the drug peddlers, and the drug menace is spreading day by

    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