TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
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>Petitioner's Bail Application Denied for NDPS Act Violation</h1> <h3>Axat Gulia Versus Customs</h3> Axat Gulia Versus Customs - TMI Issues:Bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for NDPS Act violation involving commercial quantity of psychotropic substances. Allegation of false implication, parity with co-accused, disability of petitioner's wife, and challenge to charge framing. Interpretation of Section 37 of NDPS Act for bail eligibility based on reasonable grounds and twin conditions satisfaction.Analysis:The petitioner sought bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in a case involving violations of the NDPS Act with commercial quantity of psychotropic substances. The Customs alleged that the petitioner handed over a consignment containing concealed Alprazolam tablets to a co-accused for export. The charge framed against the petitioner included serious sections of the NDPS Act, leading to the application of Section 37 of the Act.The petitioner argued false implication, citing the co-accused's bail and seeking parity. Additionally, the petitioner's wife's disability and the expected lengthy trial duration were presented. The Customs opposed bail, emphasizing the gravity of charges and reliance on a Supreme Court judgment regarding bail denial under similar circumstances.The Court analyzed Section 37 of the NDPS Act, highlighting the twin conditions necessary for bail eligibility. The provision mandates that bail can only be granted if the prosecution is given a chance to oppose and the Court is convinced of the accused's probable innocence. The Court clarified that 'reasonable grounds' for bail mean more than prima facie evidence, requiring substantial justification for believing in the accused's innocence.The Court dismissed the bail application, considering the petitioner's involvement in another similar case and the serious nature of the charges. The Court rejected the argument of lack of challenge to co-accused's bail based on a Supreme Court precedent emphasizing the stringent application of Section 37. The judgment emphasized that the petitioner did not meet the conditions for bail under the NDPS Act, leading to the application's dismissal without expressing any opinion on the case's merits.
TaxTMI 