Judicial Review Is Not A Substitute For Examiner’s Judgment: Delhi High Court Rejects DJSE Candidate’s Plea Over Alteration of Marks Part-Payments Extend Limitation - Each Payment Revives Limitation: Delhi High Court Non-Stamping Renders A Document Inadmissible, Not Void – Defect Is Curable Once Duty Is Paid: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Specific Performance MP High Court Upholds Ladli Behna Yojana Criteria; Rules Registration Deadlines and Age Limits Fall Under Executive Domain Criminal Courts Are Not Recovery Agents: Orissa High Court Grants Bail in ₹3.5 Crore Land Fraud Cases Citing Article 21 and Terminal Illness 304 Part I IPC | Sudden Fight Between Brothers Over Mud House Construction: Jharkhand High Court Converts Murder Conviction To Culpable Homicide When Rape Fails, Section 450 Cannot Stand: Orissa High Court Acquits Accused of House-Trespass After Finding Relationship Consensual Concurrent Eviction Orders Will Not Be Reopened Under Article 227: Madras High Court Section 128 Contract Act | Surety’s Liability Is Co-Extensive: Kerala High Court Upholds Recovery from Guarantors’ Salary Custodial Interrogation Not Warranted When Offences Are Not Punishable With Death or Life: Karnataka High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail to Deputy Tahsildar in Land Records Case Order VIII Rules 3 & 5 CPC | Silence Is Admission: State’s Failure To Specifically Deny Hiring Amounts To Acceptance: JK HC Consumer | No Complete Deficiency In Service — Excess Rainfall Also To Blame: Supreme Court Halves Compensation In Groundnut Seed Crop Failure Case Development Cannot Override The Master Plan: Supreme Court Nullifies Cement Unit CLU In Agricultural Zone Negative Viscera Report Is Not a Passport to Acquittal: Madras High Court Confirms Life Term of Parents for Poisoning Mentally Retarded Daughter Observations Have Had a Demoralising and Chilling Effect: Allahabad High Court Judge Recuses from Bail Matter After Supreme Court’s Strong Remarks Controversial YouTube Remarks On ‘Black Magic Village’ Not A Crime: Gauhati High Court Quashes FIR Against Abhishek Kar “Failure To Specifically Deny Allegations Amounts To Admission”: J&K High Court Reiterates Law Under Order VIII CPC Section 293 Cr.P.C. Does Not Bar Examination of Expert When DNA Report Is Disputed: MP High Court Medical Evidence Trumps False Alibi: Allahabad HC Upholds Conviction In Matrimonial Murder Where Strangulation Was Masked By Post-Mortem Burning Helping Young Advocates Is Not A Favour – It Is A Need For A Better Justice System: Rajasthan High Court Section 82 Cr.P.C. | Mere Non-Appearance Does Not Ipsi Facto Establish Absconding: Punjab & Haryana High Court Sets Aside Order Declaring Student Abroad as Proclaimed Person

"Punjab and Haryana High Court Grants Bail in Narcotics Case, Emphasizing Individual Liberty and Lack of Substantial Evidence"

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent decision, the Punjab and Haryana High Court, in a case registered under various sections of the Indian Penal Code, Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, and Arms Act, granted bail to the petitioner who had been denied bail by the trial Court. The judgment, delivered by Justice Arun Monga, underscored the significance of individual liberty and the need for substantial evidence in denying bail.

Justice Arun Monga, in his oral observation, emphasized, "Bail allows an accused to maintain his freedom until his guilt or innocence is determined. Allegations against the petitioner are a matter of trial at this stage. Conclusion of trial is still likely to take a long time... Whereas, petitioner has already been languishing in jail for the past more than 11 months in preventive custody, being behind bars since 23.08.2022."

The Court acknowledged the prosecution's concerns regarding tampering with evidence and influencing witnesses. However, it noted that the petitioner had already been in preventive custody for an extended period and that the trial was progressing at a slow pace. The Court further highlighted that the co-accused of the petitioner had been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of the same Court.

The judgment resonated with the principle of personal liberty, stating, "Considering the overall scenario and without commenting on the merits of the case, the instant petition is allowed. I am of the view that no useful purpose would be served to keep the petitioner in further preventive custody."

The Court's decision to grant bail was based on the lack of substantial evidence suggesting tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses. It also considered the fact that co-accused individuals had been granted bail under similar circumstances.

The judgment serves as a reminder of the balance between an individual's right to liberty and the interest of justice. It reaffirms that the purpose of bail is to maintain an accused's freedom until their guilt or innocence is determined, especially in cases where trial proceedings are prolonged.

The petitioner's release on bail was granted subject to certain conditions, including furnishing bail and surety bonds and surrendering the passport. The observations and submissions made in the judgment were limited to the bail hearing and are not meant to influence the trial.

Date of Decision: 07.08.2023

Gurlal Singh @ Lali VS State of Punjab 

Latest Legal News