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

2022 Supreme(P&H) 1369

ANOOP CHITKARA
Harbhajan Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Kamlesh, Advocate, Parminder Singh, Advocate, Rajat Gautam, Advocate

JUDGMENT

Anoop Chitkara, J.

FIR No.

Dated

Police Station

Sections

152

25.07.2020

City, Safidon

20/25/61/85 NDPS

1. 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 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. In paragraph 12 of the bail application, the accused declares the following criminal antecedents:

Sr. No

FIR No.

Date

Offences

Police Station

1

317

27.05.2015

20 of NDPS Act

Safidon

2

503

30.10.2019

20 of NDPS Act

Safidon

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 Court hol

    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