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

2022 Supreme(UK) 456

RAVINDRA MAITHANI
Salman – Appellant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
Gaurav Singh, Advocate, Lalit Miglani, Advocate, Shakib Husain, Advocate

JUDGMENT

Ravindra Maithani, J. - Since all these bail applications arise from one and the same FIR, they are being decided by this common order.

2. Applicants Salman, Taiyyab and Waseem are in judicial custody in FIR/Case Crime No.99 of 2022, under Sections 8/21/29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Police Station Buggawala, District Haridwar. They have sought their release on bail.

3. According to the FIR, on 17.09.2022, 10 grams Smack was recovered from co-accused Sahib. It is the case of the prosecution that Sahib revealed that he got the material from Salman, who procured it from Taiyyab. It is also the case when the co-accused Sahib was intercepted, he was pillion rider in a motorcycle driven by the applicant Waseem.

4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

5. It is argued that nothing was recovered from the applicants. There is no legally admissible evidence, which may connect the applicant with the co-accused Sahib, merely based on the statement of co-accused Sahib, they have been implicated.

6. Having considered the entirety of facts, this Court is of the view that these are the cases fit for bail and the applicants deserve to be

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