(1.) THE Complainant -Intelligence Officer of Narcotics Control Bureau, Hyderabad, Sub Zone filed the petition originally under Section 439(2) of Cr.P.C. read with 37 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 amended by Act 9 of 2001 (for short, 'the NDPS Act') with a prayer to cancel the bail order granted to the respondent/A.1 in Case No. NCB F.No. 48/1/2/2013/NCB/Sub Zone, Hyderabad and to set aside the order granting bail passed by the learned in charge Metropolitan Judge, Ranga Reddy district at L.B. Nagar in Crl. M.P. No. 1091 of 2014, dated 20.05.2014, in the interest of justice and order for remanding the respondent/A.1 to judicial custody.
(2.) IT appears from the office objection taken on maintainability of the application under Section 439(2) of Cr.P.C. from the earlier filed application under Section 437(5) of Cr.P.C. read with 37 of the NDPS Act before the learned Metropolitan Sessions -Judge, Cyberabad, at L.B. Nagar, in Crl. P. No. 239 of 2014 against the order granting bail in the above referred Crl. M.P. No. 1091 of 2014, that was ended in dismissal, thereby mentioned the provision of law as Sections 397 and 401 of Cr.P.C. as a revision impugning the same on the grounds that the judgment of the learned Judge is illegal, improper and incorrect and contrary to the rules of the criminal jurisprudence and the provisions of the NDPS Act, that the learned Judge erred in allowing the petition in Crl. M.P. No. 1091 of 2014 granting bail without following the mandatory provisions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, in as much as, the respondent (A.1) could not rebut the presumption in terms of Section 35 of the NDPS Act, that the learned Judge should have seen that the ingredients that constitute said offence are made out by the prosecution in as much as the conduct of the respondent. 1) clearly established that he contravened the provisions of the NDPS Act, that the learned Judge ought not to have passed the order without appreciating the ingredients and nature of the contraband which is Methamphetamine which is psychotropic drug in terms of Section 2 of the NDPS Act, that the learned Judge ought to have seen that genuineness of the panchanama be concluded at the stage of trial and finding given in respect of panchanama at the stage of hearing the bail application is illegal and having regard to the above the grant of bail is illegal and unsustainable as against the provisions of the NDPS Act and Rules of criminal jurisprudence, hence, prayed to set aside the order granting bail.
(3.) THE respondent. 1) to the bail cancellation petition herein, opposed the petition not only on the maintainability as a revision against the order granting bail or dismissal of the application for cancellation of bail but also on drawing attention of the Court to several minute facts of the case including from the panchanamas in saying there is no material to say the accused is likely to be convicted from facing trial and the bar under Section 37(1)(b) of the NDPS Act has no application and the learned Sessions judge was right in granting bail in Crl. M.P. No. 1091 of 2014 and the order no way requires interference much less to cancel by sitting against by this Court even from the prayer to cancel or set aside the bail order.
ABOUT US "REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD." is a Company incorporated in 1991 under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956. Since its inception to 1995, the Company was busy in carrying out the activities related to various Banks' Job Work..
Read More
Sales: sales@the-laws.com
Support: info@the-laws.com
8000853936
9376168072
27, 4TH FLOOR, Agrawal Center, Ashram Road, Income Tax, Ahmadabad 380014.
LOGIN