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 anticipatory bail should be granted in view of the allegations under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, the applicability of the statutory embargo on bail, and the petitioner's conduct in not joining investigation.
Analysis: The allegations involved recovery and alleged diversion of psychotropic and controlled substances, attracting the strict bail regime under Section 37 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. On the material placed before it, the Court found that the allegations, if proved, could establish the petitioner's involvement, and at that stage it could not be said that there were reasonable grounds for believing that he was not guilty. The Court also took note of the petitioner's repeated failure to join investigation despite summons and interim protection, his withdrawal of earlier bail proceedings, and the execution of coercive process, holding that his conduct disentitled him to discretionary relief. Parity with co-accused was rejected because the prosecution case treated their situation differently in relation to the statutory embargo.
Conclusion: Anticipatory bail was refused, and the application was dismissed.