Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Ravindra Maithani, J.
Iqrar - Appellant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand - Respondent
First Bail Application No. 200 of 2023
Decided On : 23-01-2023
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Bail Application - Applicant seeks release on bail under Sections 8/20 of the Act - Court finds applicant entitled to bail due to lack of previous conviction and recovery being less than commercial quantity
Fact of the Case:
Applicant is in judicial custody under FIR No.0368 of 2022, for alleged recovery of 320 grams Charas under Sections 8/20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985
Finding of the Court:
Court finds that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail due to lack of previous conviction and recovery being less than commercial quantity
Issues: Bail application under Sections 8/20 of the Act, alleged false implication, lack of previous conviction, recovery quantity
Ratio Decidendi: Applicant entitled to bail due to lack of previous conviction and recovery being less than commercial quantity
Final Decision: Bail application is allowed and the applicant is to be released on bail upon executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties
JUDGMENT
Ravindra Maithani, J. - Applicant-Iqrar is in judicial custody in FIR No.0368 of 2022, under Sections 8/20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, ('the Act'), Police Station Sahaspur, District Dehradun. He has sought his release on bail.
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
3. According to the FIR, on 16.12.2022, 320 grams Charas was allegedly recovered from the applicant.
4. It is the case of the applicant that he has been falsely implicated; he is not a previous convict and the alleged recovery is less than the commercial quantity.
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 the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on 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 established that prolonged custody without trial and lack of witness examination can warrant the granting of bail, even in cases involving serious charges under the NDPS Act.
The court established that prolonged detention without trial and lack of witness examination can justify the granting of bail, even in cases involving serious charges under the Narcotic Drugs and Psy....
The necessity for the prosecution to provide a representative sample in narcotics cases to establish possession beyond reasonable doubt.
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 prosecution must provide clear and representative evidence that all recovered narcotic substances contain the narcotic in question to establish possession beyond reasonable doubt.
The court established that the right to a timely trial is fundamental, and prolonged pre-trial detention without progress in the case can lead to the granting of bail, even in serious offenses under ....
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
