Supreme Court Lays Down Comprehensive Guidelines To Prevent Misuse Of POCSO Act In Matrimonial Disputes Land Reforms Act | Joint Application For Pre-Emption By Adjoining Landowners Is Maintainable: Calcutta High Court Ocular Evidence In Conflict With Medical Findings Or Withholding Of Natural Witnesses Vitiates Prosecution Case: Allahabad High Court Compassionate Appointment Claim Must Be Decided Based On Policy Prevalent At Time Of Death: Bombay High Court Section 376 IPC | Failure To Prove Initial Dishonest Intent In Marriage Promise Renders Sexual Relationship Consensual: Allahabad High Court Prolonged Incarceration And Delay In Trial Are Valid Grounds To Invoke Constitutional Right To Speedy Trial Under Article 21 In UAPA Cases: Delhi High Court Motor Vehicles Act | Insurer Liable To Pay And Recover Compensation For Gratuitous Passengers In Goods Vehicles: Gujarat High Court Proof Of Demand And Acceptance Under PC Act Must Be Evaluated Based On Preponderance Of Probabilities In Rebuttal: Kerala High Court Tenancy Claim | Mere Possession Without Lawful Foundation Or Identification Of Tenanted Land Cannot Confer Occupancy Rights: Karnataka High Court 125 CrPC | Maintenance Cannot Be Evaded By Claiming Physical Disability If Conduct Indicates Concealment Of Financial Means: Kerala High Court M.P. Municipal Corporation Act | Locus Standi Under Section 307(5) Limited To Residents Of The Municipal Area: Madhya Pradesh High Court Writ Jurisdiction | Belated Challenge To Disciplinary Action After Superannuation Amounts To Laches; Petition Dismissed: Punjab & Haryana High Court Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 CPC | Mere Pendency Of Partition Suit Does Not Entitle Plaintiff To Injunction Restraining Reconstruction Of Residential Building: Kerala High Court Not A Mere Breach Of Contract: Telangana High Court Refuses To Quash FIR In ₹73 Crore Garment Investment Fraud Section 482 CrPC | High Court Quashes FIR Following Private Compromise In Non-Heinous Dispute Arising From Civil Conflict Mere Involvement In Criminal Case Does Not Constitute Moral Turpitude To Deny Public Appointment: Telangana High Court Pendency Of Investigation Cannot Be A Blanket Ground To Deny Permission For Foreign Travel: Rajasthan High Court Fraudulent Representation By Counsel Vitiates Ex Parte Decree: Punjab & Haryana High Court Holds Professional Misconduct As Evidence Of Fraud Writ Jurisdiction | Suppression Of Material Facts Regarding Pending Criminal And Departmental Proceedings Renders Petition Liable To Dismissal: Orissa High Court Banking Fraud | Failure Of Bank Official To Conduct Physical Inspection Of Collateral Property Constitutes Criminal Conspiracy And Abuse Of Official Position: Madras High Court Fraud Vitiates Judicial Proceedings: Judgment Obtained Through Misrepresentation And Conflict Of Interest Cannot Be Sustained, Holds Punjab And Haryana High Court Discovery Under Section 27 Evidence Act From Publicly Accessible Place Requires Caution: Supreme Court Mere Recovery Of Articles At Instance Of Accused Without Independent Corroboration Cannot Sustain Conviction: Supreme Court DNA Profile Must Be Supported By Other Conclusive Evidence To Prove Guilt: Supreme Court

Bail Granted In NDPS Case: Fabricated Evidence And Irregularities: Delhi HC

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant legal development, a recent judgement has underscored the paramount importance of personal liberty in the criminal justice system. The decision, delivered by Justice Tushar Rao Gedela, has granted bail to an applicant facing charges under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, despite allegations of fabricated evidence and irregularities in the case.

The judgement, dated August 17, 2023, revolves around a bail application made under the NDPS Act. The applicant was charged with contraband possession and trafficking, primarily based on a disclosure statement of a co-accused. The court meticulously analyzed the facts of the case, including discrepancies in Panchnamas and the alleged ill conduct of officers involved in the case.

Justice Gedela observed, “The case, according to the prosecution, is hinged on the disclosure statement of one co-accused, while no contraband or any other psychotropic substance was recovered from the possession of the applicant.” The court delved into the legal aspects of admissibility of confessions made to NDPS officers, referring to recent precedents that emphasize the inadmissibility of such confessions.

Crucially, the judgement drew attention to the recent trend in legal interpretations that prioritize personal liberty and Article 21 of the Constitution of India. It cited various judgments to underscore that prolonged incarceration without a speedy trial can infringe upon an individual’s fundamental rights. The court held that the applicant, who had been in custody for nearly four years, is entitled to be released on regular bail.

The court framed stringent bail conditions, including surrendering the passport, cooperating in the trial, refraining from criminal activities, providing mobile numbers to investigating officers, and regularly informing authorities about movements outside Delhi-NCR. The court issued a stern warning that any breach of these conditions could lead to the revocation of bail.

Notably, the judgement refrained from expressing any opinion on the merits of the pending matter, focusing solely on the aspect of granting bail based on personal liberty considerations. The decision reflects a growing trend in the judicial system to ensure that the principle of “innocent until proven guilty” is upheld, while also addressing the issue of prolonged pretrial incarceration.

Date of Decision: August 17, 2023

BHASKAR KHATNANI   vs  NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU     

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

          

 

 

 

 

Latest Legal News