Jammu & Kashmir High Court Directs Construction of Overhead Bridge or Underpass on Ring Road for Safe Passage of Villagers Minor Injuries No Bar for Framing Charges Under Section 307 IPC if Intent to Kill is Present: Supreme Court Prosecution's Case Full of Glaring Doubts:  Supreme Court Overturns Conviction in Abduction and Murder Case Allegations of Dowry Demand in FIR Found Vague and Driven by Civil Property Dispute: Supreme Court Quashes FIR and Chargesheet in Dowry-Cruelty Case Local Police Failed to Perform its Duties: SC Directs New Investigating Officer in Property Dispute Properties Acquired By Gift During Marriage Remain Separate Property Of Spouse Under French Civil Code; Husband Entitled To Half Share Only In Community Assets: Madras High Court Abuse Of Process: Supreme Court Dismisses Plea Against Closure Of Human Trafficking Complaint, Flags Lack Of Bona Fides Access To Justice Cannot Be Denied When Tribunal Is Not Functioning': Calcutta High Court Holds Writ Maintainable Under Article 226 Amid Stalled Conciliation Proceedings Violation Of Natural Justice Overrides Bar On Maintainability Under Section 18 MSMED Act: Orissa High Court Panic In A Train Does Not Mean Self-Destruction: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants ₹8 Lakh Compensation For Passenger's Death In Stampede Section 101 JJ Act | Date Of Knowledge Of Order, Not Mere Knowledge Of Disposal, Commences Limitation Period: Delhi High Court Telangana High Court Quashes Order Declaring Inam Land As Govt Property Without Determining Occupancy Rights Proviso To Section 125(3) CrPC Does Not Limit Enforcement Of Monetary Relief Orders Under Section 20 DV Act: Telangana High Court Regularization Of Deviation Within Permissible Plot Envelope Governed By Uniform Fee Schedule, Arbitrary 5X Penalty Unsustainable: J&K&L High Court Man Who Blackmailed Woman With Her Own Nude Photos To Rape Her Repeatedly Can't Escape Conviction Merely Because His Voice Sample Wasn't Taken: Delhi High Court Arbitration Clause In Sale Agreement Cannot Be Invoked If Subject Matter Involves Third-Party Title Disputes: Madhya Pradesh High Court Trial Court Errs In Dismissing Amendment Plea If New Facts Emerge From Written Statement: Punjab & Haryana High Court 'No Compensation For Own Wrong': Gujarat High Court Rules Tortfeasors & Legal Heirs Cannot Claim Motor Accident Damages Under Section 166 MV Act Allahabad High Court Pulls Up Police And Magistrates Over Illegal Remand Of Juvenile Accused Section 13(1)(ia) & (ib) Hindu Marriage Act | Spouse Seeking Divorce On Grounds Of Cruelty And Desertion Must Prove Allegations With Cogent Evidence: Telangana High Court Cannot Let Land Become Banjar: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Appointment Of Receiver Under BNSS Amidst Pending Civil Title Disputes Section 8 Arbitration Act | Executing Court Must Refer Parties To Arbitration If Dispute Falls Within Scope Of Compromise Decree: Madhya Pradesh High Court Suit For Damages Arising Out Of Tortious Injury Barred By Limitation If Not Filed Within One Year: Punjab & Haryana High Court 72-Hour Gap Not Proximate: Calcutta High Court Quashes Murder Conviction, Holds 'Last Seen' Theory Inapplicable When Time Gap Is Wide Original Owner Cannot Create Trust Over Property Already Sold; Separate Relief For Title Declaration Not Required: Madras High Court

Solely Implicated Based On The Disclosure Statement Of  Co-Accused: High Court Grants Bail in NDPS Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent decision, the High Court of Punjab and Haryana granted regular bail to Akashdeep Singh, who was implicated in a drug case under the stringent Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Jasjit Singh Bedi, presiding over the matter, observed that “further incarceration of the petitioner is not required,” marking a pivotal moment in the case that has garnered attention due to its implications on bail laws in NDPS cases.

The petitioner was seeking bail in connection with FIR No.43, registered at Police Station Kahnuwan, District Gurdaspur, under Sections 22 and later 29 of the NDPS Act, 1985. The case pivoted on the fact that Akashdeep Singh was solely implicated based on the disclosure statement of a co-accused, with no corroborative evidence or recovery from him.

In his judgement, Justice Bedi noted, “the petitioner is named in the disclosure statement of his co-accused and no recovery whatsoever has been effected from him.” This observation was crucial in determining the course of the trial, as it underscored the lack of direct evidence against the petitioner.

The court’s decision was also influenced by various precedents where bail was granted under similar circumstances. These cases emphasized the importance of corroborative evidence in addition to a co-accused’s disclosure, a principle that played a significant role in this judgement.

Advocates Rajesh Kapila and Himani Kapila represented the petitioner, while Deputy Advocate General Ms. Ramta K Chaudhary represented the State of Punjab. Their arguments highlighted the nuances of the NDPS Act and the importance of personal liberty in bail considerations.

The judgement is seen as a beacon of hope for those implicated in NDPS cases on tenuous grounds. It underscores the judiciary’s balanced approach in upholding the rights of the accused while considering the seriousness of the allegations. As the trial continues, this ruling will undoubtedly be a significant reference point for future bail applications under the NDPS Act.

Date of Decision: 07 November 2023

Akashdeep Singh. VS State of Punjab.     

Latest Legal News