ANOOP CHITKARA
Kuldeep – Appellant
Versus
State Of Haryana – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Anoop Chitkara, J. - The petitioner incarcerated for violating the above-mentioned provisions of Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act) per the FIR captioned above, has come up before this Court under Section 439 Cr.P.C. 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.
| FIR No. | Dated | Police Station | Sections |
| 265 | 12.06.2021 | Purani Sabji Mandi, Rohtak, District Rohtak | 21 of NDPS Act. |
2. In paragraph 26 of the bail application, the accused declares the following criminal antecedents:
| Sr. No. | FIR No. | Dated | Offence | Police Station |
| 1. | 882 | 19.12.2020 | 20 of NDPS Act | Rohtak City, District Rohtak |
3. The petitioner contends that the pre-trial incarceration would cause an irreversible injustice to the petitioner and family.
4. While opposing the bail, the State contends that given the criminal past, the accused is likely to indulge in crime once released on bail.
REASONING:
5. In Maulana Mohd Amir Rashadi v. State of U.P., (2012) 3 SCC 382, Hon'ble Supreme C
Dataram Singh v State of Uttar Pradesh
Gudikanti Narasimhulu v Public Prosecutor
Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia v State of Punjab
Kalyan Chandra Sarkar v Rajesh Ranjan @ Pappu Yadav
Maulana Mohd Amir Rashadi v. State of U.P.
Prahlad Singh Bhati v NCT, Delhi
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.