IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
VIRENDER SINGH, J.
Devinder Singh @Deepu @Deepak Raghav - Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh - Respondent
Cr.MP(M) No.750 of 2025
Decided on : 09-05-2025
(A) Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - Section 483 - Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act - Sections 21 and 29 - Bail application - Applicant sought bail during trial for alleged possession of heroin - Police claimed evidence insufficient to connect applicant with crime - Previous cases against applicant noted - Court emphasized pre-trial punishment is prohibited - Bail granted with conditions. (Paras 1, 18, 19)
(B) Bail - Conditions for release - Court can impose reasonable conditions to mitigate risks of re-offending or non-appearance at trial. (Paras 20, 21)
Facts of the case:
The applicant, arrested on 05.09.2024, sought bail in connection with FIR No.118 of 2024 for possession of heroin. The police claimed to have recovered contraband from the applicant during a traffic check based on reliable information. The applicant contended he was falsely implicated and had no connection to the crime.
Findings of Court:
The court found that the applicant had not been convicted in previous cases and that pre-trial punishment is not permissible. The applicant was deemed eligible for bail under reasonable conditions.
Issues: The main issues included the sufficiency of evidence against the applicant and the appropriateness of granting bail given the applicant's criminal history.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the applicant's prior acquittals and the lack of evidence warranted bail, emphasizing that pre-trial punishment is not allowed.
Result: Bail application allowed.
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-Devinder Singh @Deepu @Deepak Raghav has sought his release, on bail, during the pendency of the trial, in case FIR No.118 of 2024, dated 05.09.2024, registered under Sections 21, 27A and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘NDPS Act’), with Police Station Sadar, District Shimla, H.P.
2. According to the applicant, he has falsely been implicated, in the present case and has nothing to do with the offences, for which, he has been arrested.
3. Investigation, in the present case, is stated to be completed and the charge-sheet is also stated to have been filed, in the competent Court of law.
4. As per the applicant, the police could not collect the evidence, connecting him with the crime in question.
5. Applicant has also pleaded that the following cases hav e also been registered against him:-
i. FIR No.147/2018 dated 18.07.2018, under Section 21 of NDPS Act, with PS Sadar.
ii. FIR No.201/2018 dated 29.09.2018, under Sections 279 and 337 of IPC, with PS Dhalli.
iii. FIR No.169/2022 dated 18.11.2022, under Section 21 of NDPS Act, with PS Dhalli.
iv. FIR No.21/2023 dated 08.02.2023, under Section 21 of NDPS Act, with PS Dhalli.
v. FIR No.199/2023 dated 06.12.2023, under Section 21 of NDPS Act, with PS Chandigarh.
vi. FIR No.78/2014 dated 31.03.2014, under Section 61 of Excise Act, with PS Pinjore.
6. 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 16.01.2025.
7. Thereafter, the applicant had filed CrMP(M) No.647 of 2025, before this Court. However, the same was dismissed as withdrawn, vide order dated 24.03.2025.
8. Apart from this, Mr. Mohar Singh, Advocate, appearing for the applicant, has given certain undertakings, on behalf of the applicant, for which, the applicant is ready to abide by, in case, ordered to be released on bail, during the pendency of the trial.
9. On the basis of the above facts, a prayer has been made to allow the bail application.
10. When, put to notice, the police has filed the status report, disclosing therein, that 05.09.2024, HC Lalit No.42, I/o Special Cell, Shimla, has submitted the ruqqa to Police Station Sadar, Shimla, mentioning therein that on 05.09.2024, he, along with other police officials, in private vehicle, bearing No.HP52-C-0280, was on traffic checking duty and duty to prevent the crime.
10.1. It is the case of the police that they had done the patrolling towards Old Bus Stand, Tara Hall, Lakkar Bazar and Sanjauli etc. At about 02:00 pm, when, HC Lalit, along with other police officials, was present at Bus Stop, Tara Hall, then, he received a secret information regarding the fact that one Deepak Raghav, R/o Devli Colony (applicant), is coming to take away the chitta, kept by some unknown person, as, the location of the place, where chitta has been kept, has been sent to said Deepak Raghav (applicant) on his mobile phone and in case, the said person is nabbed, heroin/chitta could be recovered. The said information was found to be authentic and reliable and according to the IO, in case, he would have made efforts to obtain authorization letter of search warrant, in that eventuality, there were chances that the contraband could be removed from there. As such, he has complied with the provisions of Section 42(2) of the NDPS Act and submitted the report to the superior officer, Special Cell, Shimla.
10.2. Thereafter, IO proceeded towards the said place i.e. Tara Hall to IGMC and Sanjauli side. At about 02:45 pm, when, IO, along with other police officials, has alighted down from the vehicle, then, on seeing the police party, Devinder Singh @Deepu @Deepak Raghav (applicant) threw a small plastic envelope out
Pre-trial punishment is prohibited; bail granted based on insufficient evidence and prior acquittals.
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 court ruled that the applicant is entitled to bail as the contraband does not constitute commercial quantity, and pre-trial punishment is prohibited.
The presumption of innocence applies in bail applications, and previous unconvicted offenses do not automatically justify denial of bail.
The court established that pre-trial detention is prohibited as punishment, and bail should not be denied based on prior unconvicted allegations, especially when no commercial quantity of narcotics i....
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, and the presumption of innocence remains until proven guilty, allowing bail when investigation is complete and no prior cases exist.
The court emphasized the need for full disclosure of prior offenses in bail applications, balancing individual liberty with societal safety.
The presumption of innocence remains intact despite the registration of a case, and bail is granted when the contraband does not meet the commercial quantity threshold.
The court emphasized the presumption of innocence and the prohibition of pre-trial punishment, allowing bail based on the completion of investigation and parity with co-accused.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.