9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (12) TMI 1395X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ge of the High Court of Delhi by the impugned order dated 18 May 2021. 3 FIR 52 of 2013 was lodged against the appellant for offences punishable under Sections 21, 29, 61 and 85 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act 1985 ["NDPS Act"] at Police Station Special Cell on 18/19 November 2013. Besides the appellant, two other co-accused were named. The appellant and another coaccused were charged with joint possession of 1 kg of heroin, recovered from a hotel room in Udaipur. The appellant and another co-accused were also charged for conspiracy under Section 29 of the NDPS Act. 4 The appellant and the co-accused were acquitted by the Special Judge, NDPS, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi of the charge of joint possession punisha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion commercial quantity of the contraband, he shall be entitled to bail if he has already undergone a total sentence of four years, which must include at least fifteen months after conviction. (iii) Where the convict is sentenced for ten years for having in his conscious possession, merely marginally more than non-commercial quantity, as classified in the table, he shall be entitled to bail if he has already undergone a total sentence of three years, which must include at least twelve months after conviction (iv) The convict who, according to the allegations, is not arrested at the spot and booked subsequently during the investigation of the case but his case is not covered by the offences punishable under section 25, 27-A and 29 of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eal No 259-DB of 2000] has similarly been clarified by the Full Bench of the High Court in Dalip Singh alias Deepa v State of Punjab [Crl Appeal No 132/DB of 2007 decided on 18 September 2009] ." 9. We have heard Ms Tanya Agarwal, counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant and Mr Sanjay Jain, Additional Solicitor General with Ms Praveena Gautam, appearing on behalf of the respondent. 10. As of date, the appellant has undergone 8 years and 5 days of custody. 11. The Additional Solicitor General submitted that it would be appropriate if this Court were to expedite the hearing of the appeal, but since the conviction is under the NDPS Act, the prayer for suspension of sentence may not be considered having regard to the seriousness of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
