Ocular Evidence Prevails Over Medical Findings: Bombay High Court Upholds Rape Conviction Despite Negative Semen Report & Police Lapses High Court Cannot Pass Inconsistent Orders: Supreme Court Quashes Demolition Order Passed Despite Earlier Restraint In CMDA Regularisation Dispute Supreme Court Upholds Validity Of Open University Degrees Obtained Prior To 2017 Cut-Off Must Be A Polluter Before Being Held Absolutely Liable: Supreme Court Sets Aside NGT Order Against Art Of Living Over Yamuna Event, Orders ₹5 Cr Refund Father Cannot Be Deprived Of Minor's Custody Unless Proved Unfit: Allahabad High Court Hands Over 4-Yr-Old Child To Father, Sets Aside Trial Court Order Right To Speedy Trial Under Article 21 Integral To Personal Liberty': Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Bail As 24 Witnesses Remain Unexamined No Specific Chemical Opinion That Seized Substance Was Ganja: Gujarat High Court Upholds Acquittal Under Section 2(iii)(b) NDPS Act Mere Pendency Of Criminal Cases Simplicitor No Ground For Externment': Karnataka High Court Quashes Raichur SDM Order Order VI Rule 16 CPC | Defendants Enjoy Greater Latitude In Altering Defence: Punjab & Haryana High Court Explains Doctrinal Leeway Under CPC Boarding Running Train Not Self-Inflicted Injury: Delhi High Court Sets Aside Order Denying Compensation Possession Of One Co-Sharer Is Possession Of All: J&K&L High Court Cannot Invoke Article 226 For Registering FIR Or Restoring Water Supply: Kerala High Court Natural Guardian's Sale Of Minor's Property Without Court Nod Is Voidable, Extinguishes If Not Challenged Within 3 Years Of Majority: Madras High Court Orissa High Court Rejects Cancer-Survivor Husband's Plea To Transfer Maintenance Case Presumption Of Correctness Of Judicial Records Not Absolute And Can Be Rebutted By Direct Evidence: Kerala High Court on Married Daughter Cannot Challenge Partition After 21-Year Slumber If She Had Knowledge: Madhya Pradesh High Court Kerala High Court Orders Immediate Suspension Of Lakshadweep CJM For Allegedly Forging Witness Deposition To Convict Accused Defect In Served Copy Of Affidavit Not Fatal: Supreme Court Restores Election Petition Challenging Lok Sabha Poll Result, Clarifies Law On Form-25 Attestation

A Habitual Offender is Not Entitled to the Grant of Bail: Punjab and Haryana High Court Dismisses Anticipatory Bail Plea

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The Punjab and Haryana High Court on Wednesday dismissed the anticipatory bail plea of Mohammad Rayyan Ansari, accused in a case pertaining to the sale of intoxicating tablets under the NDPS Act in Haryana. Justice Jasjit Singh Bedi, while pronouncing the judgment, emphasized on the criminal antecedents of the petitioner and the necessity of custodial interrogation to advance the investigation.

The petition was filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. seeking anticipatory bail concerning FIR No.143 dated 18.06.2023 registered at Police Station Munak, Karnal, Haryana. Ansari was implicated based on a disclosure statement made by a co-accused, Pardeep, who revealed Ansari as the source of the intoxicating tablets.

The Court observed, “In fact, when there are multiple FIRs against an accused over a significant period of time, then the twin conditions as envisaged under Section 37 of the NDPS Act that he had not committed an offence and was not likely to commit an offence cannot be satisfied.” The Judge further noted, “a habitual offender is not entitled to the grant of bail even under the provisions of the Cr.P.C. keeping in view his criminal antecedents.”

The State, through a status report, highlighted that the petitioner is also an accused in another FIR under the NDPS Act, and has a history of habitual offending, which makes the custodial interrogation imperative.

Various judicial precedents were deliberated upon during the hearing, especially focusing on the granting of anticipatory bail in cases where the accused is implicated based on the disclosure statement of a co-accused and has prior criminal records.

Justice Bedi, in his concluding remarks, stated, “Keeping in view the conduct of the petitioner and his criminal antecedents, his custodial interrogation would certainly be necessary to effect recoveries and to take the investigation to its logical conclusion.” Consequently, the petition for anticipatory bail was dismissed, finding no merit in the present petition.

Date of Decision: 21.09.2023

MOHAMMAD RAYYAN ANSARI vs STATE OF HARYANA  

 

Latest Legal News