https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=182021 A regular bail application was maintainable directly before the High Court because Section 439 CrPC gives concurrent bail jurisdiction to the High Court and the Sessions Court, so prior recourse to the Sessions Court was not mandatory. On the merits, the absence of the psychotropic substances from Schedule I of the NDPS Rules did not, by itself, justify bail, as the applicant was not shown to fall within the medical or scientific use exceptions and was alleged to have attempted clandestine export without licence or authorisation. The Court also applied Section 37 NDPS Act, treating the allegations as involving commercial quantity and finding that the twin bail conditions were not satisfied, so discretionary relief was refused. en-us Thu, 31 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 30 Apr 2016 10:38:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=182021 A regular bail application was maintainable directly before the High Court because Section 439 CrPC gives concurrent bail jurisdiction to the High Court and the Sessions Court, so prior recourse to the Sessions Court was not mandatory. On the merits, the absence of the psychotropic substances from Schedule I of the NDPS Rules did not, by itself, justify bail, as the applicant was not shown to fall within the medical or scientific use exceptions and was alleged to have attempted clandestine export without licence or authorisation. The Court also applied Section 37 NDPS Act, treating the allegations as involving commercial quantity and finding that the twin bail conditions were not satisfied, so discretionary relief was refused. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 31 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=182021