Back
RAVINDRA MAITHANI
Yogendra Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Ravindra Maithani, J.
Applicant Yogendra Singh is in judicial custody in FIR No.140 of 2022, under Sections 8/20/60 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, P.S. Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar. He has sought his release on bail.
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
3. According to the FIR, the applicant was riding on a motorcycle. He was signalled to stop but he did not stop. He had a bag on his shoulders. He entered into a room. He was apprehended with a bag with ganja in it. 4.1 kg ganja was recovered. FIR records that at that time the applicant has informed the police that in his room, he has kept ganja which was recovered and weighed. According to the police, ganja in commercial quantity was recovered from the two bags of the applicant, which was recovered from the room.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the recovery is false. The applicant is innocent. At the most, the recovery has been made from the bag which the applicant was holding may be taken against him at this stage, which is not the commercial quantity. He would submit that applicant has categorically stated that he was not the owner of the room. H
The court established that in bail proceedings, the sufficiency of evidence and procedural integrity are critical factors in determining whether to grant bail, particularly in cases involving narcoti....
The absence of previous conviction, the quantity of the recovered substance, and the presence of independent witnesses are crucial factors in determining bail under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropi....
The prosecution must prove that the sample taken from recovered narcotics is representative of the total quantity to establish possession beyond reasonable doubt.
Possession of narcotics exceeding the commercial quantity under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act is a critical factor in denying bail.
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 emphasized the cumulative conditions for bail under the NDPS Act, requiring reasonable grounds for believing the accused is not guilty and not likely to re-offend.
The decision emphasized the importance of considering the entirety of facts and the lack of substantial evidence against the applicant in granting bail.
The interpretation of the definition of 'Ganja' under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act and the relevance of confirmed recovered material are crucial in determining bail eligibility.
The significance of contraband quantity and compliance with Section 50 govern the grant of bail under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act.
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
