Rules of the Game Were Never Changed: Delhi High Court Upholds CSIR’s Power to Prescribe Minimum Threshold in CASE-2023 Resignation Does Not Forfeit Earned Pension: Calcutta High Court Declares Company Superannuation Benefit as ‘Wages’ Under Law Fraud Vitiates Everything—Stranger Can File Independent Suit Against Compromise Decree: Bombay High Court Refuses to Reject 49-Year-Old Challenge at Threshold Article 21-A Cannot Be Held Hostage to Transfer Preferences: Allahabad High Court Upholds Teacher Redeployment to Enforce Pupil–Teacher Ratio Arbitrator Cannot Rewrite Contract Or Travel Beyond Pleadings: Punjab & Haryana High Court Quashes ₹5.18 Crore Award Director’ in GeM Clause 29 Does Not Mean ‘Independent Director’: Gujarat High Court Sets Aside Technical Disqualification Section 25(3) Is Sacrosanct – Removal of a Trademark Cannot Rest on a Defective Notice: Delhi High Court Not Every Broken Promise Is Rape: Delhi High Court Draws Clear Line Between ‘Suspicion’ and ‘Grave Suspicion’ in False Promise to Marry Case Section 37 Is Not A Second Appeal On Merits: Delhi High Court Refuses To Re-Appreciate Evidence In Challenge To Arbitral Award Recovery After Retirement Is Clearly Impermissible: Bombay High Court Shields Retired Teacher From ₹2.80 Lakh Salary Recovery Paying Tax Does Not Legalise Illegality: Bombay High Court Refuses to Shield Alleged Unauthorized Structure Beneficial Pension Scheme Cannot Be Defeated By Cut-Off Dates: Andhra Pradesh High Court Directs EPFO To Follow Sunil Kumar B. Guidelines On Higher Pension Claims Equity Aids the Vigilant, Not Those Who Sleep Over Their Rights: Punjab & Haryana High Court Refuses to Revive 36-Year-Old Pay Parity Claim Students Cannot Be Penalised For Legislative Invalidity: Supreme Court Protects Degrees Granted Before 2005 Yash Pal Verdict Restructuring Without Fulfilment of Conditions Cannot Defeat Insolvency: Supreme Court Reaffirms Default as the Sole Trigger Under Section 7 IBC Section 100-A CPC Slams The Door On Intra-Court Appeals In RERA Matters”: Allahabad High Court Declares Special Appeal Not Maintainable Mental Distance Between ‘May Be’ and ‘Must Be’ Is Long: Patna High Court Acquits Six in Murder Case Built on Broken Chain of Circumstances Where Corruption Takes Roots, Rule of Law Is Replaced by Rule of Transaction: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Bail to DIG Harcharan Singh Bhullar

Bail in Narcotics Case, No Recovery from Petitioner's Possession – P&H HC

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent order, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has granted bail to the petitioner in a narcotics case where no recovery was made from the petitioner's possession. The judgment, delivered by Justice Deepak Gupta, highlighted that the petitioner's name had emerged solely from a disclosure statement made by co-accused individuals.

The case pertained to FIR No. 580, registered at Police Station Sadar Thanesar, District Kurukshetra, under Sections 15, 20, and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. The alleged recovery of a substantial quantity of poppy husk and Ganja was made from co-accused individuals, who implicated a supplier in their statements.

The court took note of the fact that no recovery was made from the petitioner's possession and that his name had emerged solely from the disclosure statement. Furthermore, it was revealed that the petitioner had been in custody for a considerable period, and he had already been sentenced in another case.

Justice Deepak Gupta, while granting bail, clarified that the decision did not reflect any comment on the merits of the case. The petitioner was ordered to furnish bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned.

This judgment highlights the importance of concrete evidence and raises questions about relying solely on disclosure statements without corroborating recoveries. The granting of bail in such circumstances emphasizes the principle of presumption of innocence until proven guilty.

Decided on: 29.05.2023

Rinku Ram VS State of Haryana 

Latest Legal News