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

2024 Supreme(UK) 250

RAVINDRA MAITHANI
Randheer Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Applicant :Mr. Karan Singh Dugtal, Advocate
For the State : Ms. Manisha Rana Singh, A.G.A.

JUDGMENT :

(Ravindra Maithani, J.) :

Applicant is in judicial custody in FIR No. 4 of 2023, under Section 8, 20, 27, 29 & 60 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (“the Act”), Police Station Dhumakote, District Pauri Garhwal. He has sought his release on bail.

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

3. This is second bail application of the applicant. First bail application was dismissed as withdrawn on 03.01.2024.

4. According to the FIR, Ganja in commercial quantity was allegedly recovered from the possession of the applicant on 25.02.2023.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that after his arrest, the applicant is in jail for a long; charge sheet was submitted in the case on 27.07.2023; charge was framed on 19.09.2023; PW1 was examined on 16.10.2023 and PW2 was examined on 20.11.2023. But since then, no witness has been examined. It is also submitted that the applicant has not sought any adjournment.

6. Learned State counsel admits these facts.

7. It is a case of recovery of commercial quantity of Ganja and in such cases Section 37 of the Act makes specific provisions. Bail in such cases may not be granted, unless the C

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