Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J
VISHAL JAISWAL – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF NCT OF DELHI – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. anticipatory bail sought in drug trafficking case. (Para 2 , 20) |
| 2. initial facts about the drug supply and implicated parties. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. applicant's alleged role in drug supply questioned. (Para 6 , 8 , 26) |
| 4. applicant claims non-involvement and willingness to cooperate. (Para 9 , 12 , 14) |
| 5. applicant's defense concerning his involvement and role. (Para 19) |
| 6. prosecution relies on cdrs and disclosure statements. (Para 21 , 24 , 25) |
| 7. cdrs must be corroborated; they alone cannot deny bail. (Para 28 , 32) |
2. Briefly stated, the case of the Prosecution is that on 01.06.2025, secret information was received regarding the supply of Tramadol Capsules, which is a psychotropic substance. A DD entry was lodged, and a raiding team was constituted. A trap was laid at Gate No. 2, outside Tis Hazari Court, Delhi. The secret informer identified a person standing on the footpath with a cloth/plastic bag in his hand, next to a black scooty, as the suspected supplier of “Tramadol.” He was apprehended and disclosed his name as Harish. His search was conducted, and from the bag, 15 small boxes of SPASMO PROXYVON PLUS medicine were recovered. Each box contained 18 strips with 18
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
