Attari Checkpoint Heroin Recovery: Delhi High Court Allows Bail to Trader, Claiming He Was Unaware of Contraband Hidden in Package


 Senior Advocate Siddharth Aggarwal with Advocate Nipun Katyal Chaitanya appeared in the case of Vipin Mittal v NIA on 30th May 2023 BAIL APPLN. 1168/2023

 The Delhi High Court provided bail to the owner of Shree Balaji Trading Business in a case in which 102.136 and 0.648 kgs of cocaine had been seized in an automobile carrying a piece of roots (Muleth) via Afghanistan near the Attari border in the Punjab’s Amritsar last year.

Facts of the case

The FIR was filed against NDPS Act Sections 8(c) which talks about unlawful cultivation, possession, produce, manufacture, transport, sell or purchase of coca plant or any cannabis, 21(c)contravention involves commercial quality with rigorous imprisonment of atleast 10 years, 27(a) harbours any person engaged in any of the aforementioned activities shall be punished with imprisonment, and 29 talks about abetment of the mentioned unlawful activities, and the statement of charges was submitted in the month of December 2022. The National Investigation Agency investigated the case was investigated through the National Investigation Agency, who claimed that the petitioner planned to make significant profits by importing heroin hidden in licorice root mulethi.

The court contended that the complainant had attached many certificates of commendation for his firm, particularly one from the Bar Council of Delhi including many certificates of commendation for his firm, particularly one of the Bar Council of Delhi, the judge noted. “As a result, there is information on record that suggests that the applicant had a clean background and a track record in the business, as well as no apparent relationship with other accused parties involved in its rehabilitation,” the court stated.

The court observed that the receipt of Rs. 11 lakhs in the currency as an advancement for the shipment appears to be in connection with a routine commercial agreement and that there is no unexpected gain in the applicant’s hands.

On a prima facie evaluation, the Court is of its mind that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the petitioner’s feeling guilty may not be proven, and further, there is no evidence on record to show that he was likely to be convicted of any offense while he was on bail, said the court, adding that the proceedings in the case are bound to take some time, and it might not be prudent to keep the applicant behind jail for an indefinite period, especially given his current health.’

 Courts Analysis and Decision

Judgement reviewed by- HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANISH DAYAL

Justice Dayal further stated that the applicant does not appear to be a flight risk because the petitioner is a permanent citizen of Delhi with dependents and has always assisted with the inquiry and investigation procedure. The high court further said that there were not any independent witnesses other than official witnesses, consequently, the issue of evidence manipulation did not arise.

 Sections 17, 18, and 22 A of the UAPA Act were additionally stricken from the charge sheet, therefore the subject of terror activities is no longer raised. The inquiry has shown nothing to demonstrate that there had been any specific conversation about smuggling in any of those emails.”

The court also mentioned that he had blood cancer, which is a significant medical condition. The applicant has been suffering from a life-threatening condition and demands continuous medical care, as evidenced by the medical evaluation retrieved earlier, and is not an aviation risk since he is a Delhi resident with good antecedents,”

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 a 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 review the judgement

Written By- Anushka Satwani



The Gujarat High Court affirms the judgement of the examination committee to cancel the final test of a law student at Nirma University for using unfair techniques

Karthik Deepak Sharma Vs Director General, Nirma University

Date : 28/03/2023

R/Special Civil Application No. 3752 Of 2023


The Single-Judge Bench of Sangeeta K. Vishen, J., rejected the petitioner’s request to be permitted to appear in the examination and held that using unfair means in examination is a misconduct while hearing an application in which the petitioner was penalised and the result of all the examinations of semester VII of B.Com. LL.B. (Hons.) December 2022 was cancelled by Examination Reforms Committee for using unfair means in Taxation Law examination.


The petitioner had appeared in the semester VII examination of Law of Taxation and was found with 19 printed materials, as an outcome, the result of all the examinations attended by the petitioner were declared cancelled by the Examinations Reforms Committee.

The Court noted that Section 2 of the Rules and Regulations booklet issued by Nirma University/respondent is pertinent for application to the matter at hand; it addresses academic dishonesty at examinations, tests, and assignments and sanctions in cases of using unfair means; the nature of the sanctions is the cancellation of the results of all examinations for the relevant courses. It was also observed that the petitioner was caught using a mobile device in the exam room, which is expressly forbidden by the academic regulations, while taking the Family Law II end-of-semester exam for Semester VI. He said that he accidentally left his phone in his pocket but realised it right away and handed it over to the security guard.


The Court said that the petitioner’s act of possessing 19 printed materials in the semester end examination of Law of Taxation, was a second-time misconduct. The Court further stated that the petitioner overlooked that simply owning a mobile phone constitutes misbehaviour, for which the punishment specified is the cancellation of all examination results in accordance with the rules and regulations of the educational institution.

As a result, the Court ruled that the petitioner had engaged in misconduct by possessing an electronic device, regardless of whether it was being used or not. Hence, Nirma University had every right to rely on Regulation 5(iv), and all of the examination results for the relevant courses were voided. Therefore, there is no justification for any type of temporary protection that would let the petitioner to take the exam.

The Court interpreted Regulation 3 and suggested that if the student is found possessing any kind of electronic devices, during the examination irrespective of whether it was used or not used, the same was termed to be a misconduct and,thus, one is not to go only by the penalty imposed but the nature of the malpractices committed by the petitioner as well…. 

Thus, the Court rejected the petitioner’s application to allow him to appear in the examination.


click here to view judgement

“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 a 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.”