Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
VIRENDER SINGH, J.
Roshan Kumar Jha - Appellant
Versus
State of H.P. - Respondent
Cr. MP(M) No. 772 of 2025
Decided on : 05-05-2025
(A) Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - Section 483 - Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act - Sections 21 and 29 - Bail application - Applicant claimed false implication and lack of evidence - Investigation complete, charge sheet filed - Delay in trial cited as a reason for bail - Court emphasized the necessity of satisfying twin conditions under Section 37 of the NDPS Act for bail, which were not met in this case. (Paras 1 - 26 )
(B) Bail - Conditions for granting bail under NDPS Act - The court must be satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing the accused is not guilty and unlikely to commit further offences while on bail. (Paras 13 - 19 )
(C) Reasonable grounds - The term 'reasonable grounds' requires more than prima facie evidence; it necessitates substantial probable causes for believing the accused is not guilty. (Paras 20 - 21 )
Facts of the case:
The applicant was arrested on 16.10.2022 for possession of commercial quantities of narcotics. The police found heroin and MDMA in his possession during a routine check. The applicant argued for bail based on false implication, lack of evidence, and trial delays.
Findings of Court:
The court found that the applicant did not meet the twin conditions required for bail under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, emphasizing the serious nature of the charges and the commercial quantity of drugs involved.
Issues: The main issues were whether the applicant could be granted bail despite the serious charges and the applicability of Section 37 of the NDPS Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the applicant failed to demonstrate reasonable grounds for believing he was not guilty and that he would not commit further offences if released on bail.
Result: Bail application dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
Virender Singh, J.
The applicant has filed the present application, under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the B.N.S.S.’) in case FIR No. 257 of 2022, dated 16.10.2022, under Sections 21 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act (hereinafter referred to as ‘the NDPS”) registered with Police Station, Boileauganj, Shimla, H.P.
2. According to the applicant, he has been falsely implicated in the present case, as he is an innocent person and has nothing to do with the case.
3. Applicant has further pleaded that investigation, in the present case, is complete and Police has filed the charge sheet. All these facts have been pleaded to show that custodial interrogation of the applicant is no longer required by the Police.
4. The bail has also been sought on the ground that there is no legal evidence against the applicant and he has falsely been implicated in this case by distorting the facts.
5. In addition to this, the plea of inordinate delay in trial has been put forward in this case, to get the relief. According to the applicant, he has been arrested on 16.10.2022 and there are 30 witnesses in this case, out of which, till date, only eight witnesses are stated to have been examined.
6. The applicant has also relied upon the decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 6690/2022, titled as, ‘Dheeraj Kumar Shukla versus State of Uttar Pradesh’ and Cr. Appeal No. 2787 of 2024, titled as, ‘Javed Gulam Nabi Shaikh versus State of Maharashtra & anr. and the decisions of this Court in Cr.M.P. (M) No. 892 of 2024, titled as, ‘Aakash versus State of Himachal Pradesh, Cr.M.P. (M) No. 909 of 2024, titled as, ‘Aakash versus State of Himachal Pradesh’ and Cr.M.P. (M) No. 2822 of 2022, titled as, ‘Deep Raj @ Neetu versus State of Himachal Pradesh’.
7. The applicant has also put forward his young age and future prospects, as grounds to seek relief of bail.
8. Thereafter, the applicant has again tried his luck by moving similar bail applications, bearing Cr.M.P. (M) No.1761 of 2023, Cr.M.P. (M) No. 3198 of 2023, Cr.M.P. (M) No. 1281 of 2024 and Cr.M.P. (M) No. 26 of 2025, which were dismissed as withdrawn.
9. The applicant had earlier tried his luck, by moving bail application No. 134-S/22 of 2022, before the learned Special Judge-I, Shimla, District Shimla, H.P., which was dismissed on 23.1.2023.
10. The applicant, through his counsel, has undertaken to abide by the terms and conditions, to be imposed by this court, in case, he is ordered to be released on bail.
11. On these submissions, a prayer has been made to allow the bail application.
12. When, put to notice, Police has filed status report, disclosing therein, that on 16.10.2022, HC Lalit alongwith HHC Sunil Kumar, HC Amit, Const. Bhuvnesh Kumar and Const. Rahul, under the leadership of ASI Ambi Lal was on patrolling duty and duty to check the traffic violation and to prevent the crime, in the private vehicle No.HP 52C-0426. They had proceeded towards Sankat Mochan-Tara Devi-Shoghi side. At about 11:40 a.m., when HC Lalit alongwith other police officials was present at Police barrier,Shoghi for checking, then, from Solan side, Haryana Roadways bus, being driven by its driver, came there. HC Lalit signaled to stop the vehicle. The registration of the bus was found to be HR58B-2566, enroute from Yamunanagar to Shimla. HC Lalit and HC Bhuvnesh Kumar entered the bus for checking, from front door. There were about 35- 36 passengers in the bus. HC Lalit had started checking the belongings of the passengers from the front portion of the vehicle, and when, he reached at seat Nos. 9,10, then he noticed that on seat No. 9 (window), one young man was sitting and seat No. 10 was found vacant.
12.1 The person sitting on seat No. 9 was having a rucksack in his lap. When, the reason for travelling was inquired, then, he could not give satisfactory answer and also shown his reluctance to get the rucksack che
The court emphasized that under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, bail can only be granted if there are reasonable grounds for believing the accused is not guilty and unlikely to commit further offences.
The court emphasized that under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, bail can only be granted if there are reasonable grounds to believe the accused is not guilty and unlikely to reoffend.
The court emphasized that under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, bail can only be granted if there are reasonable grounds for believing the accused is not guilty and unlikely to reoffend.
The court emphasized that bail under the NDPS Act requires satisfying mandatory conditions, including reasonable grounds for believing the accused is not guilty and not likely to commit further offen....
The court emphasized that under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, bail can only be granted if there are reasonable grounds for believing the accused is not guilty and not likely to commit further offences.
The court emphasized that under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, bail can only be granted if there are reasonable grounds to believe the accused is not guilty and unlikely to commit further offences.
The court emphasized the mandatory conditions under Section 37 of the NDPS Act for granting bail, requiring reasonable grounds for believing the accused is not guilty and assurance against further of....
The court emphasized that under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, bail can only be granted if there are reasonable grounds for believing the accused is not guilty and unlikely to commit further offenses.
Courts must strictly apply Section 37 of the NDPS Act requiring proof of non-guilt and lack of risk to public safety for bail eligibility.
The court held that bail for offences involving commercial quantities of narcotics requires strict adherence to Section 37 of the NDPS Act, emphasizing the necessity of satisfying specific conditions....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
