Shimla: Observing that pregnant women need guarantees, not prison, the Himachal Pradesh High Court is permitted on Saturday, a petition of a pregnant woman accused of cases of drug law and psychotropic (NDPS).
Justice Anoop Chitkara also said that temporary guarantees or suspension of punishment, extending to one year after giving birth, must be permitted even when the violations are very large and the accusation is very severe.
HC made it clear that even those who stood punished and their appeal was closed worth getting similar help in any camouflage that might come.
“What’s the difference with the state and society by delaying detention? Heaven will not fall if the detention is postponed.
There should be no restraint from pregnancy, there is no restraints during labor and childbirth, and there is no restraints for at least a year after giving birth.
Every woman expects dignity during Thousands, “said Justice Chitkara.
The court said that giving birth to prison can cause such trauma to children whose social hatred can follow, potentially creating eternal impacts on the mind whenever questionable about birth.
It’s time to take a cheater call to Maxim “Partus Sequitur Ventrem (which is born following the uterus)”, said the court, adding that good and nutritious food in prison can provide good physical health but cannot replace good mental health.
, A pregnant woman, arrested the arrest of accusations to conspire her husband in trading substances, from the house who the police had restored 259 grams of diacetylmorphine (heroin) and 713 grams of tablets containing Tramadol (the amount falling in the commercial category), has approached the High Court for anticipatory guarantees , Previously, the applicant had submitted a guarantee petition before the Kangra District Special Judge, but was dismissed on January 19 this year.
The court said that the mandate part 37 of the NDPS law implies that the defendant must fulfill two conditions to come out.
Evidence collected by legal investigators is insufficient to deny guarantees to the accused accused of the absence of other burdensome evidence or allegations and increasingly published by her husband’s criminal history.
Thus, the applicant has satisfied the first condition.
It is said that to fulfill the second condition, strict conditions will be needed.
Thus, on this land alone, not limited period guarantees, he has satisfied the hard part 37 of the NDPS law.
“Thus, the applicant made the case for release on guarantees during the trial on facts and special circumstances for this case,” he said.
“Given the reasons above, the court guarantees the applicant, subject to strict terms and conditions, which will be repeated and regardless of the contents of the shape of the bond in Chapter XXXIII from CRPC, 1973,” the court is said.