THE STATE OF MEGHALAYAversusLALRINTLUANGA SAILO & ANR.
Case No.: SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRIMINAL) No. 16021/2023
Decision Date: 16-07-2024
Disposal: Disposed off
Neutral Citation: 2024INSC537

 




 Disclaimer 


 
								 
						Judgments in  regional languages are also made available alongside the English version. The translations are being done with the help of various human agencies and software tools. 
						Reasonable efforts have been made to provide an accurate translation.
						 
						 Hindi Judgment as published in Ucchtam Nyayalya Nirnay Patrika are reproduced under approval of Vidhi Sahitya Prakashan, Department of legislative affairs, Govt. Of India. 
						 
						Supreme Court Registry will not responsible for incorrect or inaccurate translation and  for any error, omission or discrepancy in the content of translated text. 
						The translation of Judgements is provided for general information  and shall have no legal effect for compliance or enforcement.
						If any questions arise related to the accuracy of the information/statement contained in the translated judgment,  users are advised to verify from the original judgments and also to refer to correct position of law while referring to old judgments. 
						Visitors to the site are requested to cross check the correctness of the information on this site with the authorities concerned or consult the relevant record. The information made available here is not meant for legal evidence. Neither the Courts concerned nor the National Informatics Centre (NIC) nor the e-Committee is responsible for any data inaccuracy or delay in the updation of the data on this website. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for any damage or loss arising from the direct/indirect use of the information provided on the site. However, we shall be obliged if errors/omissions are brought to our notice for carrying out the corrections.
						 THE STATE OF MEGHALAYA  versus LALRINTLUANGA SAILO & ANR. - [2024] 7 S.C.R. 13142024 INSC 537 C.T. RAVIKUMAR, PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA Issue for Consideration Whether the High Court erred in granting bail to the accused solely on the ground that she was suffering from HIV, without adverting to the mandate under Section 37(1)(b)(ii), NDPS Act, and without taking in view the quantity of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 – s.37 – Recording a finding mandated u/s.37 is sine qua non for granting bail to accused under the Act – High Court erred in granting bail to accused solely on the ground that she was suffering from HIV, without adverting to 

Summary: Englishਪੰਜਾਬੀ - PunjabiDisclaimer 
						Judgments in  regional languages are also made available alongside the English version. The translations are being done with the help of various human agencies and software tools. 
						Reasonable efforts have been made to provide an accurate translation.
						 
						 Hindi Judgment as published in Ucchtam Nyayalya Nirnay Patrika are reproduced under approval of Vidhi Sahitya Prakashan, Department of legislative affairs, Govt. Of India. 
						 
						Supreme Court Registry will not responsible for incorrect or inaccurate translation and  for any error, omission or discrepancy in the content of translated text. 
						The translation of Judgements is provided for general information  and shall have no legal effect for compliance or enforcement.
						If any questions arise related to the accuracy of the information/statement contained in the translated judgment,  users are advised to verify from the original judgments and also to refer to correct position of law while referring to old judgments.Visitors to the site are requested to cross check the correctness of the information on this site with the authorities concerned or consult the relevant record. The information made available here is not meant for legal evidence. Neither the Courts concerned nor the National Informatics Centre (NIC) nor the e-Committee is responsible for any data inaccuracy or delay in the updation of the data on this website. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for any damage or loss arising from the direct/indirect use of the information provided on the site. However, we shall be obliged if errors/omissions are brought to our notice for carrying out the corrections.THE STATE OF MEGHALAYAversusLALRINTLUANGA SAILO & ANR.-[2024] 7 S.C.R. 13142024 INSC 537Coram : C.T. RAVIKUMAR, PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRAIssue for Consideration Whether the High Court erred in granting bail to the accused solely on the ground that she was suffering from HIV, without adverting to the mandate under Section 37(1)(b)(ii), NDPS Act, and without taking in view the quantity of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 – s.37 – Recording a finding mandated u/s.37 is sine qua non for granting bail to accused under the Act – High Court erred in granting bail to accused solely on the ground that she was suffering from HIV, without adverting to