Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Mr. Justice Virender Singh, J
Prem Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Virender Singh, J.)
By way of the present application, filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘BNSS’), applicant-Prem Singh has sought his release, on bail, during the pendency of the trial, in case FIR No.33 of 2024, dated 25.09.2024, registered under Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘NDPS Act’), with Police Station Chopal, District Shimla, H.P.
2. According to the applicant, he is innocent person and has falsely been implicated, in the present case, for allegedly cultivating opium plants, in his field.
3. The case of the prosecution is stated to be fragile and doubtful.
4. It has been averred in the application that the applicant is having no criminal antecedents and is ready to abide by any condition, imposed by this Court, in case, ordered to be released on bail, during the pendency of the trial.
5. According to the applicant, he had earlier tried his luck by moving similar application, before the Court of learned Special Judge-I, Shimla, District Shimla, Himachal Pradesh. However, the same was dismissed, vide order dated 29.03.2025.
6. On the basis of
The court held that the applicant's presumption of innocence remains intact as the quantity of opium cultivated does not meet the commercial threshold, allowing bail under specific conditions.
The court ruled that bail cannot be denied as a form of punishment, emphasizing the presumption of innocence and the absence of commercial quantity in the contraband case.
The presumption of innocence remains intact despite multiple cases against the applicant, and bail is granted as the quantity of contraband does not constitute 'commercial quantity' under the NDPS Ac....
The presumption of innocence remains until conviction, and bail may be granted based on parity with co-accused and absence of commercial quantity of contraband.
Pre-trial punishment is prohibited; bail granted based on insufficient evidence and prior acquittals.
The court granted bail based on the presumption of innocence, noting that the quantity of contraband did not invoke stricter bail provisions.
The court ruled that the applicant is entitled to bail as the contraband does not constitute commercial quantity, and pre-trial punishment is prohibited.
The court ruled that the applicant's possession of a non-commercial quantity of narcotics allows for bail, emphasizing the presumption of innocence and the prohibition of pre-trial punishment.
Pre-trial punishment is prohibited; bail may be granted when the contraband does not constitute commercial quantity, ensuring the applicant's rights are protected.
Bail cannot be denied based on punishment; presumption of innocence prevails unless proven guilty, especially when the contraband does not meet the commercial quantity threshold.
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
