Back
RAKESH THAPLIYAL
Pawant Singh Bisht – Appellant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
This is second bail application moved on behalf of the applicant seeking bail in relation to FIR No. 214 of 2020 for the offences punishable under Section 8/20/60 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 registered at P.S. Lalkuan District Nainital.
2. The first bail application being BA1 No. 2060 of 2020 was dismissed as not pressed vide order dated 16.09.2022.
3. As per the prosecution, when the police party was on daily routine of patrolling to maintain peace and security during covid period they saw a vehicle (white in colour) UK04Z5454 coming from the Haldwani towards Lalkuan, they stopped the vehicle in which three persons were sitting and when asked to show the papers of the vehicle, then the two persons confessed that they have charas with them. The search was made before the gazetted officer and during search in a polythene 5.2kg charas was recovered from the possession of the present accused. In the back seat of the vehicle one another person namely Prakash Chandra was sitting from whose possession 4.9 kg charas was recovered.
4. The learned senior counsel for the applicant submits that the mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act have not been compl
The judgment established that the prolonged incarceration and the absence of criminal antecedents can be considered in granting bail under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, even in cases involving commerci....
Prolonged incarceration may override the statutory embargo created under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, leading to the grant of bail in certain cases.
Prolonged incarceration and lack of criminal history can justify bail under the NDPS Act, despite the commercial quantity of drugs involved.
The court established that the presence of cannabis in the forensic report could mitigate the application of Sec. 37 of the NDPS Act, allowing for bail under specific circumstances.
Prolonged incarceration and lack of witness examination can justify granting bail under the NDPS Act, despite the stringent conditions imposed by Section 37.
The court emphasized that under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, bail cannot be granted unless there are reasonable grounds to believe the accused is not guilty and unlikely to commit further offences.
The court underscored the stringent bail conditions under the NDPS Act, demanding substantial evidence to justify release for defendants in drug-related cases.
Bail denied in NDPS commercial quantity case as vehicle occupants prima facie in conscious possession of contraband; twin conditions under Section 37 not satisfied despite trial delay.
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
