Back
VIKAS BAHL
Ram Singh @ Ramu @ Ramu Siteka – Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Vikas Bahl, J. (Oral)
This is the first petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory/pre-arrest bail to the petitioner in FIR No.169 dated 06.12.2021, registered under Sections 21 & 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (Section 29 of the NDPS Act added later on), at Police Station Boha, District Mansa.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in the present case no recovery has been effected from the petitioner and he has only been implicated on the basis of disclosure statement made by co-accused, namely, Surjit Singh and Lakhpreet Singh, from whom the recovery of 10 grams of heroin has been made. It is submitted that the petitioner is not even remotely linked with the said recovery and he is not involved in any other case under the NDPS Act. It is also submitted that even the alleged recovery from the co-accused would not fall in the category of commercial quantity and in fact is marginally higher than the small quantity.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon an order passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court dated 17.06.2020 in CRM- M-12051-2020 titled “Mewa Singh Vs. State of Punjab”, in which in
The admissibility and veracity of the disclosure statement, the petitioner's involvement in other cases, and the non-commercial quantity of narcotics were key legal considerations in granting anticip....
The absence of recovery from the accused and the quantity of the alleged drug are crucial factors in considering the grant of anticipatory bail under the NDPS Act.
The legal principle established is that implicating a person solely based on a disclosure statement without recovery and in the absence of safeguards infringes constitutional guarantees and may warra....
The inadmissibility of confessional statements made before police officers and the requirement of non obstante clause to convict a person under the NDPS Act without safeguards.
The court emphasized that a person's involvement based solely on a co-accused's disclosure statement may not be sufficient to deny anticipatory bail under the NDPS Act.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the need to consider the role of the accused in the case and other circumstances before rejecting bail applications solely based on criminal antece....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the principle for granting anticipatory bail in cases where a person has only been proceeded against on the basis of a disclosure statement of a co....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the consideration of evidence, false implication, and readiness to cooperate in granting anticipatory bail.
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
