Sanjay Kumar Bhartiya vs Directorate Of Revenue on 18 February, 2016

: SUNITA GUPTA, J.
1. Vide this application under Section 438 Cr.PC, the petitioner seeks anticipatory
bail in SC No. 06A/2015 Vide F.No. DRI/HQ/GI/338/XVIII/ENQ-91NT – NIL/2015
under Sections 25A/29 NDPS Act.
2. Mr Ramesh Gupta, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that a false
case has been registered by DRI officials under Section 25A and 29 of the NDPS Act,
1985 (hereinafter, ‘the Act’) wherein the petitioner has been unnecessarily implicated
who is only an ordinary director and is not concerned with day-to-day affairs of the
company. No recovery has been effected either from the petitioner or at his instance.
He is ready to join investigation. The provisions of Section 37 of the Act are not
attracted in the instant case. The offence allegedly pertains to a controlled substance
which is punishable under Section 25A of the Act where no minimum punishment has
been provided, therefore, there is no embargo of Section 37 of the Act. Some of the co-
accused have already been released on bail. As such the petitioner be also granted
protection.

Source: Indian Kanoon

Leave a Reply

*