Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the petitioner was entitled to bail under the NDPS Act in view of the allegations, the licensed manufacture of the recovered tablets, the disputed invoices and the need for a fresh fact-finding report before reconsideration of bail.
Analysis: The recovery of COLDSET tablets from the petitioner's unit was held not, by itself, to establish illegality because the competent authority had expressly permitted manufacture and marketing of the product, and the chemical composition found in the samples matched permitted components. The allegation regarding fake bills and supply to non-existent firms was considered insufficiently investigated on the material then available, while the Court also noted that if the alleged supplies were genuine, the stricter bar under Section 37 of the NDPS Act would not automatically apply. In view of the seriousness of the allegations and the need for an official verification of the factual matrix from the concerned authorities in Himachal Pradesh and Uttarakhand, a fresh fact-finding exercise was directed.
Conclusion: The petitioner was not granted an immediate final bail order, but the matter was sent back for fresh consideration after receipt of the fact-finding report, with a direction that if two views were possible, he should be released on bail.