1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
TaxTMI Login
🚀 New: Section-Wise Filter ✕
Just a moment...
1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Court grants bail due to lack of evidence linking petitioner to contraband, emphasizing need for concrete proof.</h1> The court granted bail to the petitioner due to insufficient evidence linking them to the contraband found on the co-accused. It emphasized the necessity ... - Issues:1. Bail application based on recovery of contraband from co-accused.2. Admissibility of secret information in the case.3. Interpretation of Section 37 of the NDPS Act.4. Consideration of past judicial decisions on similar circumstances for granting bail.Analysis:1. The petitioner's counsel argued that no recovery was made from the petitioner, but contraband was allegedly found on the co-accused. Citing past cases, it was emphasized that without evidence linking the petitioner to the contraband, bail should be granted. The court noted that the recovery from the co-accused alone does not establish the petitioner's guilt.2. The defense relied on legal precedents to challenge the admissibility of secret information without the informant's examination. Referring to a Supreme Court case, it was highlighted that such information is inadmissible unless the informant is examined as a witness.3. The State contended that Section 37 of the NDPS Act applied due to the recovery of contraband. However, the court reasoned that without concrete evidence linking the petitioner to the contraband, the application of Section 37 was not straightforward. The court emphasized the lack of admissible evidence connecting the petitioner to the recovered contraband.4. Past judicial decisions were crucial in determining the petitioner's bail eligibility. Citing cases where recovery from co-accused did not lead to the accused's guilt, the court found reasonable grounds to believe the petitioner was not involved in the offense. Considering the petitioner's clean record and no likelihood of reoffending, bail was granted upon furnishing a personal bond.In conclusion, the court granted bail to the petitioner based on the lack of evidence linking them to the recovered contraband, the inadmissibility of secret information without the informant's examination, and the absence of criminal antecedents. The judgment underscored the importance of substantive evidence in establishing guilt and the need for a fair assessment of each case for bail consideration.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
