Unregistered Agreement Of Sale Entered Before Attachment Cannot Defeat Decree-Holder’s Claim: Andhra Pradesh High Court No Presumption That Joint Family Possesses Joint Property; Female Hindu Absolute Owner Of Property Purchased In Her Name: Allahabad High Court Age Determination Must Strictly Follow Hierarchy Of Documents Under JJ Act: Orissa High Court Acquits Man Of POCSO Charges Once 'C' Form Declarations Are Signed, Burden Shifts To Buyer To Prove Payment Of Outstanding Dues: Madras High Court Section 213 Succession Act No Bar To Eviction Suit If Claim Is Based On Landlord-Tenant Relationship, Not Title Under Will: Bombay High Court Meritorious Candidate Wrongfully Denied Appointment Entitled To Notional Seniority & Old Pension Scheme: J&K & Ladakh High Court 6-Year Delay In Propounding Will & Hostile Attesting Witness Constitute 'Grave Suspicious Circumstances': Delhi High Court Refuses Probate Section 319 CrPC Power Cannot Be Exercised Based On FIR Or Section 161 Statements: Allahabad High Court Quashes Summoning Of Unmarried Sisters Bail Proceedings Cannot Be Converted Into Recovery Proceedings; Court Can't Order Sale Of Accused's Property: Supreme Court Able-Bodied Husband Cannot Defeat Maintenance Claim By Projecting Income Below Minimum Wages: Delhi High Court Recording Section 313 CrPC Statement Before Cross-Examination Of Prosecution Witness Does Not Vitiate Trial: Karnataka High Court Murder By Unknown Assailants Is Not 'Accidental Death' Under Mukhymantri Kisan Bima Yojna: Allahabad High Court Section 311 CrPC | Court Not A Passive Bystander, Must Summon Material Witness If Essential For Just Decision: Rajasthan High Court

Drug Peddlers... Need to be Dealt With Firmly and Sternly With No Sympathy – High Court in Narcotic Drugs Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a landmark judgment on the 26th of February 2024, the Punjab and Haryana High Court, presided over by Justice Sandeep Moudgil, firmly rejected a bail petition in a case involving narcotics possession under the NDPS Act.

 

The judgment revolved around a regular bail plea under Section 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code in a case registered under Section 22 of the NDPS Act. The court’s decision was heavily influenced by the provisions of Sections 35 and 37 of the NDPS Act.

Petitioner Gautam Sehgal, a chemist, was accused of having unaccounted intoxicant capsules and tablets. The FIR specified the seizure of red and brown capsules, along with white tablets, without valid documentation.

 

Severity of Drug Menace: The court highlighted the extensive drug trafficking issue in Punjab, acknowledging its devastating effects on youth and the larger society.

Petitioner’s Alleged Role: The absence of valid prescriptions or bills for the seized narcotics pointed towards Sehgal’s involvement in illicit drug activities.

Presumption of Culpability: According to Section 35 of the NDPS Act, the court presumed a culpable mental state due to the lack of a convincing explanation from Sehgal.

Criteria for Bail: Referencing Section 37 of the NDPS Act, the judgment underlined that bail is not merited unless there are reasonable grounds to believe in the accused’s innocence.

Ongoing Investigation: The decision to deny bail was also influenced by the ongoing investigation and the pending Forensic Science Laboratory report.

Decision The court, underscoring the need for a stringent approach against drug traffickers, dismissed Sehgal’s bail application, citing the case’s serious nature and the ongoing investigation.

 Date of Decision: 26.02.2024

Gautam Sehgal Versus State of Punjab

 

Latest Legal News