Back
RAVINDRA MAITHANI
Prempal Maurya – Appellant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Ravindra Maithani, J. - Applicant-Prempal Maurya is in judicial custody in FIR No.317 of 2022, under Sections 8 & 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Police Station Mukhani, District Nainital. He has sought his release on bail.
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
3. According to the FIR, on 22.12.2022, 73.26 gm. smack was allegedly recovered from the applicant.
4. It is the case of the applicant that he has been falsely implicated; there is non-compliance of the provisions of the Act; there is no independent witness and he is not a previous convict.
5. Learned State Counsel would submit that the bail rejection order does not reveal any previous conviction of the applicant.
6. Having considered, this Court is of the view that it is a case fit for bail. Accordingly, the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail.
7. The bail application is allowed.
8. Let the applicant be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned.
The court's decision was based on the assessment of the case as fit for bail, considering the lack of previous conviction and the arguments presented by the applicant.
The court has the discretion to grant bail after considering the circumstances and arguments presented by both parties.
The court's discretion in granting bail under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, based on the circumstances of the case.
Possession of less than commercial quantity of narcotics can be a factor in granting bail under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.
The significance of contraband quantity and compliance with Section 50 govern the grant of bail under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act.
The decision emphasized the importance of material evidence and lack of disputed factual aspects in granting bail under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.
The court's decision was influenced by the lack of evidence, non-compliance of mandatory provisions, and the absence of previous convict status in granting bail under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotro....
The court's decision was influenced by the consideration of the alleged recovered quantity, lack of previous conviction, and non-compliance of the provisions of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Su....
The court's decision was influenced by the interpretation of the provisions of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, regarding bail applications and the consideration of the quant....
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
