https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=752871 Export of a psychotropic substance required a specific export authorization under the NDPS Rules; a general licence to trade in drugs did not dispense with that requirement. The Court therefore treated the licensing argument as untenable. On bail, it found prima facie material of a planned attempt to export Tramadol under a false description, supported by altered invoices, communications and cash recovery, so the stringent conditions under Section 37 of the NDPS Act applied and bail was refused to those applicants. By contrast, the material against another applicant was limited to forwarding documents and related communications, without sufficient proof of conscious participation or criminal intent, so Section 37 was not attracted and bail was granted. en-us Fri, 17 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 03 Jan 2025 14:49:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=752871 Export of a psychotropic substance required a specific export authorization under the NDPS Rules; a general licence to trade in drugs did not dispense with that requirement. The Court therefore treated the licensing argument as untenable. On bail, it found prima facie material of a planned attempt to export Tramadol under a false description, supported by altered invoices, communications and cash recovery, so the stringent conditions under Section 37 of the NDPS Act applied and bail was refused to those applicants. By contrast, the material against another applicant was limited to forwarding documents and related communications, without sufficient proof of conscious participation or criminal intent, so Section 37 was not attracted and bail was granted. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 17 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=752871