Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 7 of 7 (0.33 seconds)Section 18 in The Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 [Entire Act]
Section 439 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Tofan Singh vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 29 October, 2020
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the
petitioner was not named in the FIR but only in the disclosure statements of
the arrested accused. Pursuant to the arrest of the petitioner, no recovery
was effected from him. Therefore, as there was no admissible evidence
whatsoever available against the petitioner, he was entitled to the concession
of bail in view of the judgments passed in the cases of 'Tofan Singh versus
State of Tamil Nadu, 2020 AIR (Supreme Court) 5592', 'Rakesh Kumar
Singla versus Union of India 2021 (1) RCR (Criminal) 704'; 'Surinder
Kumar Khanna versus Intelligence Officer Directorate of Revenue
Intelligence, 2018(3) RCR (Criminal) 954'; 'State by (NCB) Bengaluru
versus Pallulabid Ahmad Arimutta & Anr. 2022(1) RCR (Criminal) 762'
and 'Sanjeev Chandra Agarwal & Anr. Versus Union of India 2021(4)
RCR (Criminal) 590', moreso when two similarly situated co-accused,
namely, Mukesh Kumar @ Vekuli Yadav and Ajay Ram had been granted
the similar concession vide orders dated 26.04.2022 and 11.05.2023.
Section 61 in The Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 [Entire Act]
The Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985
Surinder Kumar Khanna vs Intelligence Officer Directorate Of ... on 31 July, 2018
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the
petitioner was not named in the FIR but only in the disclosure statements of
the arrested accused. Pursuant to the arrest of the petitioner, no recovery
was effected from him. Therefore, as there was no admissible evidence
whatsoever available against the petitioner, he was entitled to the concession
of bail in view of the judgments passed in the cases of 'Tofan Singh versus
State of Tamil Nadu, 2020 AIR (Supreme Court) 5592', 'Rakesh Kumar
Singla versus Union of India 2021 (1) RCR (Criminal) 704'; 'Surinder
Kumar Khanna versus Intelligence Officer Directorate of Revenue
Intelligence, 2018(3) RCR (Criminal) 954'; 'State by (NCB) Bengaluru
versus Pallulabid Ahmad Arimutta & Anr. 2022(1) RCR (Criminal) 762'
and 'Sanjeev Chandra Agarwal & Anr. Versus Union of India 2021(4)
RCR (Criminal) 590', moreso when two similarly situated co-accused,
namely, Mukesh Kumar @ Vekuli Yadav and Ajay Ram had been granted
the similar concession vide orders dated 26.04.2022 and 11.05.2023.
1