Registrar Has No Power To Cancel Registered Sale Deeds: Madras High Court Reaffirms Civil Court’s Exclusive Jurisdiction MP High Court Refuses to Quash FIR Against Principal of Sacred Heart Convent High School in Forced Conversion Case Employees Of Registered Societies Cannot Claim Article 311 Protection: Delhi High Court Clarifies Limits Of Constitutional Safeguards In Private Employment Maintenance Cannot Be Doubled Without Cogent Reasons, Wife's Education And Earning Capacity Relevant Factors: Gujarat High Court A Foreign Award Must First Be "Recognised" Before It Becomes A Decree: Bombay High Court A Registered Will Does Not Become Genuine Merely Because It Is Registered: Andhra Pradesh High Court Rejects Suspicious Testament Compensation Under Railways Act Requires Proof of Bona Fide Passenger – Mere GRP Entry and Medical Records Cannot Establish ‘Untoward Incident’: Delhi High Court Tenancy Rights Cannot Be Bequeathed By Will: Himachal Pradesh High Court Declares Mutation Based On Tenant’s Will Void Preventive Detention Cannot Be Based On Mere Apprehension of Bail: Delhi High Court Quashes PITNDPS Detention Order Probate Court Alone Has Exclusive Jurisdiction To Decide Validity Of Will – Probate Petition Cannot Be Rejected Merely Because A Civil Suit Is Pending: Allahabad High Court PwD Candidates Cannot Be Denied Appointment After Selection; Authorities Must Accommodate Them In Suitable Posts: Supreme Court Directs SSC And CAG To Appoint Candidates With Disabilities When Registered Partition Deed Exists, Plea Of Prior Oral Partition Cannot Override It:  Madras High Court Dismisses Second Appeal Municipal Bodies Cannot Demand Character Verification Of Residents: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Surveillance Condition In Building Sanction State Cannot Exploit Contractual Workers For Perennial Work: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Pay Parity To PUNBUS Drivers And Conductors Police Inputs Cannot Create New Building Laws: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Security-Based Conditions Near Nabanna 'Raising A Child As Daughter Does Not Make Her An Adopted Child': Punjab & Haryana High Court Once Leave Under Section 80(2) CPC Is Granted, Prior Notice to Government Is Not Mandatory: Orissa High Court Restores Trial Court Decree State Cannot Use Article 226 To Evade Compliance With Court Orders: Gauhati High Court Dismisses Union’s Petition With Costs ED Officers Accused Of Assault By ₹23-Crore Scam Accused – FIR Survives But Probe Shifted To CBI: Jharkhand High Court High Courts Should Not Interfere In Academic Integrity Proceedings At Preliminary Stage: Kerala High Court Power Of Attorney Holder With Personal Knowledge Can Depose In Cheque Bounce Cases: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Acquittal Agreement Cannot Dissolve Hindu Marriage, But Can Prove Mutual Separation”: J&K & Ladakh High Court Denies Maintenance

Court Identifies Material Change in Circumstances": High Court Grants Second Bail to Accused in N.D.P.S. Act Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent ruling, the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench has granted bail to Prem Paudel, who was accused under various sections of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act. The Hon'ble Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan, J., delivered the decision on October 4, 2023.

The bail has been granted in Paudel's second application after his initial bail application was rejected in May 2022. The Court cited "material change in circumstances" as a significant factor for reconsidering his bail application. "Detention of more than 6 years in this case and the release of the identically placed co-accused person namely Sita Nepali, in the considered opinion of this Court, are sufficient ground to infer material change in circumstances since rejection of first bail application," the Court noted in its observations.

Defense Counsel Piyush Kumar Singh argued that there had been a lack of compliance with the Section 50 of the NDPS Act, affecting the arrest and recovery process. He also highlighted the duration of Paudel's detention and the release of a similarly situated co-accused, Sita Nepali, as changes warranting the approval of the second bail application.

However, the counsel for the opposite party, Akhilesh Kumar Awasthi, opposed the bail application stating that Paudel's first bail application had already been rejected on merits and also pointed out that Paudel is a Nepali citizen, making it difficult to secure his presence for trial.

Despite opposition, the Court allowed the bail application with specific conditions, including the non-tampering with prosecution evidence and sincere cooperation in the trial. The Court also stated, "Presence of the applicant may also be secured before the trial court by placing adequate conditions/restrictions."

The ruling emphasizes that its observations are solely for the purpose of this bail application and should not be construed as a comment on the merits of the case.

Date of Decision:  4.10.2023

Prem Paudel vs Union Of India Thru. Intelligence Office N.C.B.   

Latest Legal News