Court could not deny freedom to a person simply because he is impoverished: Uttarakhand High Court

Court could not deny freedom to a person simply because he is impoverished is upheld by the Uttarakhand High Court in the case of Ajeet Pal v. State of Uttarakhand through Justice Ravindra Maithani.


In the instant case, the petitioner, who was detained by the court pursuant to Sections 8 and 20 of the 1985 Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, had appealed the Special Court Dehradun’s decision to deny his motion to lessen the required sureties.

This Court increased the applicant’s bail, but he was unable to regain his freedom since he was unable to secure sureties. V.K. Gemini, the D.A.G. for the State, had claimed that the petitioner was a native of Uttar Pradesh and that a commercial amount of charas was found on him. If he was granted bail, he might not show up. However, following court orders, he was granted bail and required to provide sureties by the relevant court. As it turned out, he was unable to manage the sureties, so he filed an application from jail asking for the court to reduce the amount of sureties, but this request was denied by the court in question. Therefore, the present application was submitted.


The Uttarakhand High Court while dismissing the application and lowering the sum of the sureties observed that they could not deny freedom to a person simply because he is impoverished.

Accordingly, the Court granted the request to lower the number of sureties required for bail.

PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into the category of Best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.


Click here to view the judgement



Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Open chat