Employees Cannot Pick Favourable Terms and Reject the Rest: Bombay High Court Upholds SIDBI’s Cut-Off Date for Pension to CPF Optees Rules of the Game Were Never Changed: Delhi High Court Upholds CSIR’s Power to Prescribe Minimum Threshold in CASE-2023 Resignation Does Not Forfeit Earned Pension: Calcutta High Court Declares Company Superannuation Benefit as ‘Wages’ Under Law Fraud Vitiates Everything—Stranger Can File Independent Suit Against Compromise Decree: Bombay High Court Refuses to Reject 49-Year-Old Challenge at Threshold Mere Long Possession By One Co-Owner Does Not Destroy The Co-Ownership Right Of The Other: Madras High Court State Cannot Hide Behind An Illegal Undertaking: Punjab & Haryana High Court Questions Denial Of Retrospective Regularization Article 21-A Cannot Be Held Hostage to Transfer Preferences: Allahabad High Court Upholds Teacher Redeployment to Enforce Pupil–Teacher Ratio Arbitrator Cannot Rewrite Contract Or Travel Beyond Pleadings: Punjab & Haryana High Court Quashes ₹5.18 Crore Award Director’ in GeM Clause 29 Does Not Mean ‘Independent Director’: Gujarat High Court Sets Aside Technical Disqualification Section 25(3) Is Sacrosanct – Removal of a Trademark Cannot Rest on a Defective Notice: Delhi High Court Not Every Broken Promise Is Rape: Delhi High Court Draws Clear Line Between ‘Suspicion’ and ‘Grave Suspicion’ in False Promise to Marry Case Section 37 Is Not A Second Appeal On Merits: Delhi High Court Refuses To Re-Appreciate Evidence In Challenge To Arbitral Award Recovery After Retirement Is Clearly Impermissible: Bombay High Court Shields Retired Teacher From ₹2.80 Lakh Salary Recovery Paying Tax Does Not Legalise Illegality: Bombay High Court Refuses to Shield Alleged Unauthorized Structure Beneficial Pension Scheme Cannot Be Defeated By Cut-Off Dates: Andhra Pradesh High Court Directs EPFO To Follow Sunil Kumar B. Guidelines On Higher Pension Claims Equity Aids the Vigilant, Not Those Who Sleep Over Their Rights: Punjab & Haryana High Court Refuses to Revive 36-Year-Old Pay Parity Claim Students Cannot Be Penalised For Legislative Invalidity: Supreme Court Protects Degrees Granted Before 2005 Yash Pal Verdict Restructuring Without Fulfilment of Conditions Cannot Defeat Insolvency: Supreme Court Reaffirms Default as the Sole Trigger Under Section 7 IBC Section 100-A CPC Slams The Door On Intra-Court Appeals In RERA Matters”: Allahabad High Court Declares Special Appeal Not Maintainable Mental Distance Between ‘May Be’ and ‘Must Be’ Is Long: Patna High Court Acquits Six in Murder Case Built on Broken Chain of Circumstances Where Corruption Takes Roots, Rule of Law Is Replaced by Rule of Transaction: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Bail to DIG Harcharan Singh Bhullar Mere Voter List and Corrected SSC Certificate Cannot Prove Paternity: Andhra Pradesh High Court Rejects 21-Year-Old Bid for DNA Test in Partition Appeal Section 147 NI Act Makes Offence Compoundable At Any Stage: Karnataka High Court Sets Aside Concurrent Convictions in Cheque Bounce Case After Settlement Bald Allegations of Adultery Based on Suspicion Cannot Dissolve a Marriage: Jharkhand High Court Once a Document Is Admitted in Evidence, Its Stamp Defect Cannot Be Reopened: Madras High Court

"Punjab and Haryana High Court Grants Bail to First-Time Offender in NDPS Act Case: Upholds Constitutional Right to Speedy Trial"

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Punjab and Haryana High Court, led by HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI, has granted bail to Gurpreet Singh, a first-time offender, in a case registered under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act. The judgment, delivered on September 29, 2023, emphasizes the importance of a speedy trial and adherence to statutory provisions in NDPS cases.

The judgment noted, "The petitioner is stated to be in custody since 09.10.2021, and none of the 11 prosecution witnesses have been examined so far. He is also a first-time offender with no other case registered against him."

The court considered the constitutional right to a speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. It observed that in this situation, the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act can be diluted, especially when two of Gurpreet Singh's co-accused, Gurjit Singh and Inderjit Singh, had been granted similar relief.

The judgment further highlighted the delay in the trial process and the need for bail. "The conclusion of trial will take some reasonable time, regardless of the direction issued by the High Court to conclude the same within one year from the date of framing of charges," it stated.

In its decision, the court ordered Gurpreet Singh to be released on bail, subject to specific conditions to be fulfilled to the satisfaction of the concerned authorities. These conditions include regular appearances before the police station and a bond deposit.

This ruling aligns with recent Supreme Court precedents cited in the judgment, which emphasized the grant of bail to first-time offenders facing delays in trial proceedings. Notably, the judgment underscores the importance of balancing the interests of justice with the right to personal liberty, particularly in cases involving contraband substances.

The case was represented by Mr. G.S. Madaan, Advocate for the Petitioner, and Mr. Kirat Singh Sidhu, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, appearing as State Counsel.

Date of Decision:-29.09.2023

Gurpreet Singh.  vs  State of Punjab.

 

Latest Legal News