Madras HC: Police Superintendent not Liable For IO’s Delay In Filing Chargesheet or Closure Report  ||  Supreme Court: Provident Fund Dues Have Priority over a Bank’s Claim under the SARFAESI Act  ||  SC Holds Landowners Who Accept Compensation Settlements Cannot Later Seek Statutory Benefits  ||  Supreme Court: Endless Investigations and Long Delays in Chargesheets Can Justify Quashing  ||  Delhi HC: Arbitrator Controls Evidence and Appellate Courts Cannot Reassess Facts  ||  Delhi HC: ED Can Search Anyone Holding Crime Proceeds, not Just Those Named in Complaint  ||  Delhi HC: ED Can Search Anyone Holding Crime Proceeds, not Just Those Named in Complaint  ||  Delhi HC: Economic Offender Cannot Seek Travel Abroad For Medical Treatment When Available In India  ||  SC: Governors and President Have No Fixed Timeline To Assent To Bills; “Deemed Assent” is Invalid  ||  SC: Assigning a Decree For Specific Performance of a Sale Agreement Does Not Require Registration    

Union of India (UOI) vs. Ajay Kumar Singh - (Supreme Court) (28 Mar 2023)

No person, accused of an offence involving trade in commercial quantity of narcotics, is liable to be released on bail

MANU/SC/0316/2023

Narcotics

The Appellant-Union of India has preferred present appeal against the final judgment and order passed by the High Court allowing Bail Application and directing for the release of the Respondent-accused on bail. The Respondent-accused is alleged to be involved in Case arising out of Case under Sections 8/20/27-A/29/32 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act).

The High Court, in passing the impugned order of bail, had lost sight of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, which, inter alia, provides that no person accused of an offence involving commercial quantity shall be released on bail unless the twin conditions laid down therein are satisfied, namely,(i)the public prosecutor has been given an opportunity to oppose the bail application; and (ii) the court is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that he is not guilty of such an offence and that he is not likely to commit any such offence while on bail.

No person accused of an offence involving trade in commercial quantity of narcotics is liable to be released on bail unless the court is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that he is not guilty of such an offence and that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail.

The quantity of “ganja” recovered is admittedly of commercial quantity. The High Court has not recorded any finding that the Respondent-accused is not prima facie guilty of the offence alleged and that he is not likely to commit the same offence when enlarged on bail rather his antecedents are indicative that he is a regular offender. In the absence of recording of such satisfaction by the court, the High Court manifestly erred in enlarging the respondent-accused on bail.

In view of the facts and circumstances and considering the role assigned to the Respondent- accused and the illegality committed in releasing him on bail, present Court set aside the impugned final order passed by the High Court. Appeal allowed.

Tags : BAIL   GRANT   DIRECTIONS  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2025 - All Rights Reserved