Electricity Act 2003 | Section 56(2) Does Not Preclude Licensee From Raising Supplementary Demand After Two Years; Only Restricts Right To Disconnect: Supreme Court Dissolution Of Partnership At Will | Outgoing Partner Entitled To Market Value Of Assets As On Date Of Distribution, Not Date Of Dissolution: Supreme Court SEBI | Release Of Escrow Under Buyback Regulations Does Not Preclude Independent Inquiry Into Fraud Under PFUTP Regulations: Supreme Court Promotion Based On Merit Does Not Wipe Out Past Adverse Records But Must Be Balanced In FR 56(j) Compulsory Retirement: Supreme Court Appellate Court Can Convict For Offence Even If Charge Not Framed By Trial Court Under Section 464 CrPC: Supreme Court Extradition | Sovereign Assurance Does Not Override Judicial Sentencing; Cannot Be Used To Artificially Accelerate Sentence Completion: Supreme Court Article 21 | State Has A Positive Duty To Protect Public Health By Implementing Front-Of-Package Labelling Regulations: Supreme Court Revenue Entries Are Not Documents Of Title, Cannot Replace Substantive Evidence In Property Disputes: Supreme Court Long Possession Without Hostile Animus Does Not Amount To Adverse Possession: Supreme Court Administrative Discretion Must Comply With Article 14; Subsequent Executive Decisions Cannot Retroactively Cure Failure Of Timely Performance: Supreme Court Municipal Corporation Cannot Unilaterally Downgrade Market Value Of Land Acquired For Road Widening To Deny TDR Certificates: Andhra Pradesh High Court Execution Of Agreement To Sell Does Not Automatically Terminate Existing Tenancy: Allahabad High Court Writ Jurisdiction Not Maintainable When Title To Property Is Under A Cloud And Subject Matter Of Disputed Facts: Andhra Pradesh High Court Amendment Of Plaint Seeking Impleadment Of Third Parties And Addition Of Time-Barred Claims In A Partition Suit Cannot Be Permitted: Bombay High Court Reassessment Order Does Not Result In Merger Of Original Assessment Order If Issues Are Distinct: Andhra Pradesh High Court GST Assessment Order Uploaded Only Under 'Additional Notices' Tab Without Separate Intimation Violates Principles Of Natural Justice: Calcutta High Court 'Prolonged Inaction' Cannot Be Rewarded: Delhi High Court Upholds CESTAT Refusal To Condone 968-Day Delay In Filing Customs Appeal Probate No Longer Mandatory To Establish Rights Under A Will Following 2025 Amendment To Indian Succession Act: J&K High Court Review Jurisdiction Cannot Be Used To Introduce New Factual Foundations Or Reopen Concluded Arbitral Awards: Karnataka High Court High Court Cannot Invoke Article 227 To Strike Off Plaint When Statutory Remedy Under Order VII Rule 11 CPC Is Available: Madras High Court Section 58 BNSS | Detention Beyond 24 Hours Without Magistrate’s Authority Vitiates Arrest And Subsequent Remand: Orissa High Court Arbitrator Is The Sole Judge Of Quality And Quantity Of Evidence, Court Cannot Act As Court Of Appeal: Punjab & Haryana High Court Section 5 Limitation Act | Court Cannot Condone Delay In A Mechanical Manner Without Ascertaining Bona Fides Of The Applicant: Calcutta High Court High Court Cannot Quash FIR Under Section 482 CrPC By Conducting Mini-Trial On Merits: Punjab & Haryana High Court Taxation Law | Mere Assertion Of Natural Justice Violation On Disputed Facts Won't Bypass Statutory Appeal: Delhi High Court

No Ground for Bail in Commercial Quantity Drug Cases: Delhi High Court Dismisses Bail Application in NDPS Act Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


Delhi High Court, in a significant ruling, has dismissed the bail application of one Guddu Khan, who was apprehended with a commercial quantity of heroin. Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajnish Bhatnagar, while delivering the judgment on December 22, 2023, emphasized the seriousness of the offence involving narcotics, especially when the quantity is commercial as per the NDPS Act.

Guddu Khan, accused under Section 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (NDPS Act), was denied regular bail in connection with FIR No. 121/2020. The Court noted that the petitioner was caught red-handed with 300 grams of heroin, a quantity classified as 'commercial' under the law. Justice Bhatnagar, in his decision, stated, "considering the period of incarceration as the petitioner has undergone nearly three years two months which is not even near to half of the minimum sentence of ten years, no ground for bail is made out."

The Court's decision hinges significantly on Section 37 of the NDPS Act, which imposes strict conditions for the grant of bail in cases involving commercial quantities of drugs. The judgment read, "The scheme of Section 37 NDPS Act reveals that the exercise of power to grant bail is not only subject to the limitations contained under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C., but is also subject to the limitation placed by Section 37 which commences with non-obstante clause."

In his observations, Justice Bhatnagar remarked, "The expression 'reasonable grounds' means something more than prima facie grounds." He further added that the circumstances of the case and the nature of the offence did not provide reasonable grounds to believe that the accused was not guilty of the alleged offence.

The Court also dismissed the argument regarding the non-consideration of CCTV footage and CDR (Call Detail Records) of the petitioner, citing that the immediate apprehension of the accused with the contraband was a significant factor in the decision.

Date of Decision: 22.12.2023

GUDDU KHAN VS STATE NCT OF DELHI

 

Latest Legal News