Kerala HC: Physiotherapists and Occupational Therapists Cannot Use “Dr.” Without Medical Degree  ||  Delhi High Court: Law Firms Must Verify Cited Case Laws; Senior Counsel Not Responsible for Finality  ||  MP High Court Dismisses Shah Bano’s Daughter’s Plea, Rules ‘Haq’ Movie is Fiction  ||  Bombay HC Cancels ERC Order, Rules Stakeholders Must Be Heard Before Amending Multi-Year Tariff  ||  Calcutta High Court Rules Dunlop’s Second Appeal Not Maintainable under the Trade Marks Act  ||  Kerala HC: Revisional Power U/S 263 Not Invocable When AO Grants Sec 32AC Deduction After Inquiry  ||  J&K&L HC: Section 359 BNSS Doesn’t Limit High Court’s Inherent Power U/S 528 to Quash FIRs  ||  Bombay HC: BMC Ban on Footpath Cooking via Gas/Grill Doesn’t Apply to Vendors Using Induction  ||  Madras HC: Buyer Not Liable for Seller’s Tax Default; Purchase Tax Can’t Be Imposed under TNGST Act  ||  Kerala HC: Oral Allegations Alone Insufficient to Sustain Bribery Charges Against Ministers    

Ram Singh vs. NCB (Neutral Citation: 2023:HHC:14522) - (High Court of Himachal Pradesh) (26 Dec 2023)

Unless the conditions as laid down under Section 37 of the NDPS Act are satisfied, the bail cannot be granted to an accused, who has been found in possession of commercial quantity of contraband

MANU/HP/2462/2023

Narcotics

By way of instant petition filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.), the Petitioner is seeking bail in case FIR under Sections 20 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 registered with Narcotics Control Bureau.

The bail application has been filed by the Petitioner on the ground that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The learned counsel for the Petitioner has contended that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 20th October, 2022 and the trial is not going to be completed in near future, therefore, the Petitioner deserves to be released on bail, as no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping him behind the bars for an unlimited period.

The Petitioner has not made out a case for grant of bail, as a perusal of the record indicates that, the quantity of the charas/cannabis recovered from the petitioner is 4.424 Kg, which is a commercial quantity. Since the quantity of the contraband falls within the definition of commercial quantity, therefore, the grant of the bail in present case is governed by the provision of Section 37 of the NDPS Act.

Thus, in view of the decisions of Apex Court, unless the conditions as laid down under Section 37 of the NDPS Act are satisfied, the bail cannot be granted to an accused, who has been found in possession of the commercial quantity of the contraband under the provisions of the NDPS Act.Moreover, the limitations on granting of bail specified in clause (b) of subsection (1) of Section 37 of the NDPS Act are in addition to the limitations under the Code of CrPC.

In the instant case, prima facie the Petitioner has been found to be in possession of 4.424 Kgs. of charas/cannabis, which is a commercial quantity and has failed to satisfy the conditions, as provided under Section 37 of the NDPS Act. Furthermore, the trial in the case has commenced and the case is listed for recording the statements of prosecution witnesses, as such the trial is likely to be concluded in near future. Hence, the bail application filed by the Petitioner is dismissed.

Tags : TRIAL   BAIL   GRANT  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2025 - All Rights Reserved