Safety Shoes Used as Weapon Meets Mens Rea Requirement for Murder: Rajasthan HC on Bail Denial    |     Right to Be Considered for Promotion, Not a Right to Promotion: Supreme Court Clarifies Eligibility for Retrospective Promotion    |     Inherent Power of Courts Can Recall Admission of Insufficiently Stamped Documents: Supreme Court    |     Courts Cannot Substitute Their Opinion for Security Agencies in Threat Perception Assessments: J&K High Court Directs Reassessment of Political Leader's Threat Perception    |     Service Law | Violation of Natural Justice: Discharge Without Notice or Reason: Gauhati High Court Orders Reinstatement and Regularization of Circle Organizers    |     Jharkhand High Court Quashes Family Court Order, Reaffirms Jurisdiction Based on Minor’s Ordinary Residence in Delhi    |     Ex-Serviceman Status Ceases After First Employment in Government Job: Calcutta High Court Upholds SBI’s Cancellation of Ex-Serviceman's Appointment Over False Declaration of Employment    |     Maxim Res Ipsa Loquitur Applies When State Instrumentalities Are Directly Responsible: Delhi High Court Orders MCD to Pay ₹10 Lakhs Compensation for Death    |     Wilful Avoidance of Service Must Be Established Before Passing Ex Parte Order Under Section 126(2) CrPC: Patna High Court Sets Aside Ex Parte Maintenance Order    |     MP High Court Imposes Rs. 10,000 Costs for Prolonging Litigation, Upholds Eviction of Petitioners from Father's Property    |     When Detention Unnecessary Despite Serious Allegations of Fraud Bail Should be Granted: Kerala HC    |     Magistrate's Direction for Police Inquiry Under Section 202 CrPC Is Valid; Petitioner Must Await Investigation Outcome: Bombay High Court Dismisses Advocate's Petition as Premature    |     Relocation Alone Cannot Justify Transfer: Supreme Court Rejects Plea to Move Case from Nellore to Delhi, Orders Fresh Probe    |    

Gujarat High Court Denies Bail in High-Profile Narcotics Case: "Active Participation in Conspiracy to Import Heroin" Cited as Key Reason

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling today, the Gujarat High Court, presided over by Justice Divyesh A. Joshi, dismissed a bail application in a high-profile narcotics case involving the illegal import of heroin. The case, Dipak Ashok Kingar vs. State of Gujarat, has drawn considerable attention due to the serious nature of the allegations and the large quantity of narcotics involved.

Justice Joshi, in his detailed judgment, underscored the gravity of the offence and the applicant's suspected involvement in the narcotics trafficking network. "It prima facie appears from the materials available on record that the present applicant-accused has actively participated or rather has played a vital role in hatching the conspiracy along with the other co-accused persons some of which are foreigners to illegally import the contraband substance heroin from Dubai to India via sea shipping in a concealed manner," stated Justice Joshi in his observation.

The applicant, Dipak Ashok Kingar, was seeking regular bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, in connection with FIR C.R. No.III-04 of 2022 registered at the ATS Police Station, Ahmedabad. The charges against Kingar include offenses under Sections 8(c), 21(c), 23(c), and 29 of the NDPS Act.

Kingar's defense centered around the argument that there was no physical recovery of narcotics from him and that his involvement was only indicated through communications and coordination with co-conspirators. However, the prosecution strongly opposed the bail, highlighting Kingar's significant role in the conspiracy to import a huge quantity of heroin.

The court, in its decision, referenced several key legal precedents, including the Toofan Singh vs. State of Tamil Nadu case, to emphasize the stringent conditions under the NDPS Act for granting bail in cases involving commercial quantities of narcotics.

The ruling also noted the extensive investigation conducted by the authorities, which included communication records and testimonies that pointed to Kingar's involvement. "The quantity of heroin recovered in the present case is commercial in nature... the offence committed by him against which there is a strong suspicion has to give way to his right of personal liberty," Justice Joshi remarked, highlighting the balance between personal liberty and public safety.

This judgment is seen as a strong message against narcotics trafficking and the illegal drug trade's impact on society, particularly the younger generation. The court's decision to deny bail in this case is a clear indicator of the judiciary's stance on serious drug-related offences.

Decided on: 11-12-2023

DIPAK ASHOK KINGAR vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

 

Similar News