Back
RAVINDRA MAITHANI
Shoaib – Appellant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Ravindra Maithani, J.
Applicants Shoaib and Sajia are in judicial custody FIR/Case Crime No. 292 of 2022, under Section 8/22/60 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (“the Act”), Police Station Vanboolpura, District Nainital. They have sought their release on bail.
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
3. According to the FIR, on 08.09.2022, narcotic substances, in commercial quantity, were recovered from the possession of the applicants.
4. Learned counsel for the applicants has tendered for the perusal of the Court the ordersheet of the case. It is taken on record.
5. Learned counsel for the applicants would submit that in the instant case, after the arrest of the applicants on 08.09.2022, charge sheet was submitted on 19.12.2022; charges were framed on 25.03.2023; the examination in chief of PW1 was recorded on 15.09.2023, but, it was not concluded on that date and the prosecution sought adjournment. Thereafter, the PW1 has not been produced for his examination in chief.
6. These factual aspects have not been denied by the learned State Counsel.
7. It is a case pertaining to recovery of narcotic substances in commercial quantity
The court established that while Section 37 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act imposes strict conditions for bail, the right to a timely trial is paramount, and undue delay in procee....
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 ....
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....
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 Psychotropic Substances Act.
The court established that the right to a timely trial is fundamental, and prolonged detention without trial can warrant the granting of bail, even in serious narcotic cases under Section 37 of the A....
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 decision emphasized the importance of considering the entirety of facts and the lack of substantial evidence against the applicant in granting bail.
Bail application – Denial of bail does not give unfettered liberty to prosecution to keep a person in custody without conducting trial.
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
