TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether the appellants were entitled to bail in a prosecution under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 despite the stringent restrictions on bail. (ii) Whether the alleged non-compliance with the mandatory search procedure under the Act was a relevant circumstance for granting bail.
Issue (i): Whether the appellants were entitled to bail in a prosecution under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 despite the stringent restrictions on bail.
Analysis: The appellants were in custody in a case involving seizure of ganja and cash, and the statutory restrictions on bail under the NDPS regime were acknowledged. At the same time, the record disclosed unusual circumstances surrounding the alleged detention and the communication sent to the authorities, which were treated as relevant to the bail consideration.
Conclusion: The appellants were held entitled to bail.
Issue (ii): Whether the alleged non-compliance with the mandatory search procedure under the Act was a relevant circumstance for granting bail.
Analysis: The allegation of violation of the mandatory search requirements was raised at the bail stage, but the earlier order had not addressed it. The mandatory nature of compliance with the search requirement was treated as a material factor that ought to have been considered while deciding bail.
Conclusion: The alleged non-compliance was held to be a relevant factor supporting grant of bail.
Final Conclusion: Bail was granted to both appellants on specified conditions, and the trial was directed to be expedited.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
