Supreme Court Lays Down Comprehensive Guidelines To Prevent Misuse Of POCSO Act In Matrimonial Disputes Land Reforms Act | Joint Application For Pre-Emption By Adjoining Landowners Is Maintainable: Calcutta High Court Ocular Evidence In Conflict With Medical Findings Or Withholding Of Natural Witnesses Vitiates Prosecution Case: Allahabad High Court Compassionate Appointment Claim Must Be Decided Based On Policy Prevalent At Time Of Death: Bombay High Court Section 376 IPC | Failure To Prove Initial Dishonest Intent In Marriage Promise Renders Sexual Relationship Consensual: Allahabad High Court Prolonged Incarceration And Delay In Trial Are Valid Grounds To Invoke Constitutional Right To Speedy Trial Under Article 21 In UAPA Cases: Delhi High Court Motor Vehicles Act | Insurer Liable To Pay And Recover Compensation For Gratuitous Passengers In Goods Vehicles: Gujarat High Court Proof Of Demand And Acceptance Under PC Act Must Be Evaluated Based On Preponderance Of Probabilities In Rebuttal: Kerala High Court Tenancy Claim | Mere Possession Without Lawful Foundation Or Identification Of Tenanted Land Cannot Confer Occupancy Rights: Karnataka High Court 125 CrPC | Maintenance Cannot Be Evaded By Claiming Physical Disability If Conduct Indicates Concealment Of Financial Means: Kerala High Court M.P. Municipal Corporation Act | Locus Standi Under Section 307(5) Limited To Residents Of The Municipal Area: Madhya Pradesh High Court Writ Jurisdiction | Belated Challenge To Disciplinary Action After Superannuation Amounts To Laches; Petition Dismissed: Punjab & Haryana High Court Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 CPC | Mere Pendency Of Partition Suit Does Not Entitle Plaintiff To Injunction Restraining Reconstruction Of Residential Building: Kerala High Court Not A Mere Breach Of Contract: Telangana High Court Refuses To Quash FIR In ₹73 Crore Garment Investment Fraud Section 482 CrPC | High Court Quashes FIR Following Private Compromise In Non-Heinous Dispute Arising From Civil Conflict Mere Involvement In Criminal Case Does Not Constitute Moral Turpitude To Deny Public Appointment: Telangana High Court Pendency Of Investigation Cannot Be A Blanket Ground To Deny Permission For Foreign Travel: Rajasthan High Court Fraudulent Representation By Counsel Vitiates Ex Parte Decree: Punjab & Haryana High Court Holds Professional Misconduct As Evidence Of Fraud Writ Jurisdiction | Suppression Of Material Facts Regarding Pending Criminal And Departmental Proceedings Renders Petition Liable To Dismissal: Orissa High Court Banking Fraud | Failure Of Bank Official To Conduct Physical Inspection Of Collateral Property Constitutes Criminal Conspiracy And Abuse Of Official Position: Madras High Court Fraud Vitiates Judicial Proceedings: Judgment Obtained Through Misrepresentation And Conflict Of Interest Cannot Be Sustained, Holds Punjab And Haryana High Court Discovery Under Section 27 Evidence Act From Publicly Accessible Place Requires Caution: Supreme Court Mere Recovery Of Articles At Instance Of Accused Without Independent Corroboration Cannot Sustain Conviction: Supreme Court DNA Profile Must Be Supported By Other Conclusive Evidence To Prove Guilt: Supreme Court

"No Grounds for Arrest; Anticipatory Bail Granted in NDPS Case ," States High Court of Punjab and Haryana

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


Chandigarh, July 28, 2023 - In a landmark ruling, the High Court of Punjab and Haryana granted anticipatory bail to Pushpinder Kumar alias Pushpinder Singh alias Tinku. The case had been filed under Sections 15, 18, 20, 21, and 22 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajbir Sehrawat, presiding over the case, stated, "In view of the above, it can safely be construed that there is nothing to support the case of the prosecution, even as per the assertions of the police. As such, the petitioner deserves to be protected against his arrest."

The court allowed the petition on grounds of no substantial evidence against the petitioner. It ruled that the petitioner, if arrested, must be released on bail, provided he furnishes personal bonds/surety, and complies with the investigation as and when required, in accordance with Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

The case had been lodged at the Police Station City Hoshiarpur, District Hoshiarpur. The petitioner's counsel had argued that the case was fabricated and registered with a mala fide intention. The prosecution had no evidence to support its case, leading to this decision by the court.

Furthermore, the person who lodged the FIR without any substantial basis has been ordered to pay compensation of Rs.10,000 to the petitioner. "Since the FIR has been got registered even before creating a basis for that, and due to the FIR, the petitioner has been put to the harassment and expenses," the judge noted in his order.

Date of Decision: 26th July 2023

Pushpinder Kumar vs   State of Punjab   

Latest Legal News