Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 4 of 4 (0.72 seconds)Section 29 in The Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 [Entire Act]
Tofan Singh vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 29 October, 2020
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner
has been falsely implicated in this case. The petitioner was not found at the
spot and
d has been involved in this case on the basis of the disclosure statement
made by the co-accused,
co who himself was nominated by a co
co-accused, which
is not admissible in law against the petitioner. To fortify this argument,
learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the authority of Hon'ble
Supreme Court rendered in Tofan Singh vs. State of Tamil Nadu : (2021) 4
SCC 1. It is further argued that the
t no subsequent recovery has been effected
from the petitioner. The petitioner is not involved in any othe
otherr criminal case.
Ajmal T. A. @ Kuru vs State By Kerala on 23 August, 2023
5. In reply, learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon an
order dated 23.08.2023, passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Special
Leave to appeal (Crl.) No. 6599/2023, titled as Ajmal T. A. @ Kuru vs. State
of Kerala,, whereby
whereby in similar circumstances, the petitioner
petitioner-accused
accused had been
granted concession of regular bail by observing that there was remote
likelihood of the petitioner's involvement as the alleged involvement was
entirely based upon the co-accused's
co accused's statement and alleged call details record.
1