Order XLI Rule 23A CPC | Re-Trial Necessary When Crucial Parties Impleaded In Appeal: Telangana High Court Cannot Freeze Entire Bank Account For Small Disputed Sums: Rajasthan High Court Issues Comprehensive Guidelines Against Indiscriminate Account Freezes In Cyber Crime Probes 187(3) BNSS | No Extension Of Investigation Time Without Notice To Accused: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Default Bail In NDPS Case Road Widening Under Master Plan Cannot Be Stalled For Formal Land Acquisition, Section 305 Permits Direct Removal Of Encroachments: Madhya Pradesh High Court P&H High Court Quashes Preventive Detention Over 45-Day Delay In Informing Detenu Of Right To Represent 'Sole Allegation Of Torture Cannot Stand Alone': Andhra Pradesh High Court Acquits Husband Under Section 498A IPC After Dowry Demand Disproved Seeking Corroboration To Victim's Testimony Amounts To Adding Insult To Injury: Bombay High Court Upholds Rape Conviction Offences Of Cheating & Criminal Breach Of Trust Cannot Coexist On Same Facts: Calcutta High Court Quashes FIR Over Commercial Contract Dispute "Accident Alone Is Not Proof": Delhi High Court Acquits Bus Driver In 2003 Road Fatality Case, Rules Mere Speeding Or Collision Insufficient For Section 304A IPC Mandate Of Regulations Must Be Read Into Public Notices: Kerala High Court Reverses Order Directing NMC To Reopen Portal For Medical College's PG Seat Hike Unproven 1946 Oral Sale And Subsequent School Gift Cannot Convey Valid Title Over Tribal Land: Orissa High Court Orders Compensation After 80 Years ED Can Probe Money Laundering In J&K Corruption Cases: J&K High Court Rules S. 5(1)(d) J&K PC Act Corresponds To Amended S. 7 Of Central PC Act Not Mere Lip Service: Supreme Court Quashes GST Notice Under Section 74 Lacking Foundational Facts Of Fraud Or Suppression Selling Manufactured Goods At Factory Premises Doesn't Turn 'Industrial' Land Into 'Commercial' For Stamp Duty: Supreme Court Supreme Court Orders All States To Form Dedicated SITs To Probe Fake Motor Accident Claims, Warns Insurance Top Brass Against Selective Referrals Port Trusts Not Immune From Customs Duty On Pilfered Goods: Supreme Court Upholds Notification Declaring Mumbai Port Trust As Custodian Under Section 45

High Court Grants Regular Bail Based on Parity and Length of Custody in NDPS Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant development, the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh has granted regular bail to the petitioner, Gurmeet Singh, in a case registered under Sections 15 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. The judgment, delivered by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Avneesh Jhingan on 14th July, 2023, considered the petitioner's claim of parity with a co-accused and the length of custody as crucial factors in the bail decision.

Quoting from the judgment, Justice Avneesh Jhingan stated, "On the basis of parity of petitioner vis-a-vis co-accused so far as grant of bail is concerned and though the investigation is complete, conclusion of trial is likely to take time, the petitioner is granted bail subject to his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned."

The court further clarified that the grant of bail does not express any opinion on the merits of the case and that the trial would proceed independently. The petitioner was ordered to abide by certain conditions, including not tampering with evidence, not pressurizing witnesses, and appearing before the trial court as required.

The decision of the High Court relied on previous judgments from the Hon'ble Supreme Court, emphasizing the significance of custody duration in bail decisions under the NDPS Act, 1985. Justice Jhingan cited cases where bail was granted based on the length of custody, even in the face of the stringent provisions of the NDPS Act.

The judgment, which grants relief to Gurmeet Singh after two years, five months, and 27 days of custody, highlights the court's commitment to upholding individual rights enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The court considered the potential violation of the petitioner's right to liberty and concluded that further incarceration would be unjust.

It is important to note that the judgment does not express any opinion on the merits of the case, and the trial will proceed independently. The decision is expected to have a significant impact on future bail applications in similar cases, providing an avenue for individuals to seek relief based on custody duration and parity with co-accused.

Date of Decision: 14th July, 2023

Gurmeet Singh vs State of Punjab

Latest Legal News