IMPORTANT POINT
The court established that the parameters for granting bail must ensure the accused's presence during trial, emphasizing the need for reasonable conditions and the concept of conscious possession in drug-related offences.

JUDGMENT :

Rakesh Kainthla, J.

The petitioner has filed the present petition for seeking regular bail. It has been asserted that the petitioner was arrested vide FIR No. 23 of 2025, dated 2.3.2025, registered at Police Station, Solan, District Solan, H.P., for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 21 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (in short ‘the ND&PS Act’). He is a permanent resident of Village Bharandi, Post Office Tehsil Junga, District Shimla, H.P. As per the prosecution, 14.44 grams of heroin was recovered from the possession of the petitioner. The police have completed the investigation, and custody of the petitioner is not required. The quantity of the heroin stated to have been recovered from the possession of the petitioner is intermediate, and the rigours of Section 37 of the ND&PS Act do not apply to the present case. The petitioner has roots in society, and there is no chance of his absconding. Hence, it was prayed that the present petition be allowed and the petitioner be released on bail.

2. The petition is opposed by filing a status report asserting that the police party was on patrolling duty on 2.3.2025. They received information at 6.00 PM that a vehicle bearing registration No. HP-63D-9903 was transporting heroin, and in the case of a search of the vehicle, a huge quantity of heroin could be recovered. The police reduced the information to writing and sent it to the Supervisory OfÏcer. The police associated Dinesh Kumar and intercepted the vehicle at 6.35 PM. The driver identified himself as Kuldeep Kumar (present petitioner), and the person sitting beside him identified himself as Palvinder Singh. The police searched the vehicle and recovered a polythene packet containing 14.44 grams of heroin. The police seized the heroin and arrested the occupants of the vehicle. The heroin was sent to FSL, and as per the report, it was found to be a sample of Diacetylmorphine. The challan is yet to be prepared in the present matter. Hence, the status report.

3. I have heard Mr. Kush Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Lokender Kutlehria, learned Additional Advocate General, for the respondent-State.

4. Mr. Kush Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he was falsely implicated. The quantity of heroin stated to have been found in the possession of the petitioner is intermediate, and the rigours of Section 37 of the ND&PS Act do not apply to the present case. Hence, he prayed that the present petition be allowed and the petitioner be released on bail.

5. Mr. Lokender Kutlehria, learned Additional Advocate General for the respondent-State, submitted that the petitioner is involved in the commission of the heinous offence. The consumption of heroin is affecting the younger generation adversely, and as such, the offence should not be viewed lightly. Hence, he prayed that the present petition be dismissed.

6. I have given considerable thought to the submissions made at the bar and have gone through the records carefully.

7. The parameters for granting bail were considered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Ramratan v. State of M.P. , 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3068 , wherein it was observed as under: -

“12. The fundamental purpose of bail is to ensure the ac- cused's presence during the investigation and trial. Any conditions imposed must be reasonable and directly related to this objective. This Court in Parvez Noordin Lokhandwalla v. State of Maharastra (2020) 10 SCC 77 ob- served that though the competent court is empowered to exercise its discretion to impose “any condition” for the grant of bail under Sections 437(3) and 439(1)(a) CrPC, the discretion of the court has to be guided by the need to facilitate the administration of justice, secure the pres- ence of the accused and ensure that the liberty of the accused is not misused to impede the investigation, over- awe the witnesses or obstruct the course of justice. The relevant obser