The court emphasized that the parameters for granting bail include the nature of accusations, gravity of the offence, and the accused's societal ties, allowing bail when evidence is insufficient.

JUDGMENT :

(Rakesh Kainthla, J.)

Since all the bail petitions arise out of the same F.I.R.; therefore, these are taken up together for disposal by way of a common judgment.

2. The petitioners have filed the present petitions for seeking regular bail. It has been asserted that F.I.R. No. 15 of 2025, dated 08.02.2025, was registered at Police Station Chowari, District Chamba, H.P., for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 20 , 25 and 29 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (for short ‘NDPS Act’) against the petitioners. The petitioners have been falsely implicated. There is nothing to connect the petitioners with the commission of a crime. The petitioners are the permanent residents of District Chamba, H.P., and they have roots in the society. The custody of the petitioners is not required, and they would abide by all the terms and conditions, which the Court may impose. Hence, the petitions.

3. The petitions are opposed by filing status reports asserting that the police party had set up a Nakka at Tunnuhatti on 08.02.2025, and they were checking the vehicles. A Pick-up bearing registration No. HP73A-6721 came from Bannikhet towards the police at 12:10 a.m. The police signalled the driver to stop the vehicle and asked him to get the vehicle checked. The driver and other occupants of the vehicle got frightened and started prevaricating. The police became suspicious. The police called Sanjeev Kumar, who was standing near the Excise barrier and in his presence asked for the names of the occupants of the vehicle. The driver identified himself as Munaver Ali. The person sitting beside the driver revealed his name as Amar Nath, and the other person revealed his name as Parveen Kumar. The police checked the vehicle and found a black backpack kept beneath the driver's seat. The police checked the backpack and found 986 grams of cannabis. The police seized the cannabis and arrested the occupants. The samples were sent to SFSL, and as per the report of the analysis, the exhibit is an extract of cannabis and sample of Charas. F.I.R. No. 80 of 2017 was registered against petitioner Parveen Kumar, but he was acquitted on 28.03.2025. The petitioners are involved in the commission of the heinous offence, which is adversely affecting the young generation, therefore, it was prayed that the present petitions be dismissed.

4 I have heard Mr. Kulbhushan Khajuria, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Ajit Sharma, learned Deputy Advocate General for the respondent-State.

5. Mr. Kulbhushan Khajuria, learned counsel for the petitioners, submitted that the petitioners are innocent and they were falsely implicated. There is no legal evidence against them. The quantity of charas stated to have been recovered from the possession of the petitioners is an intermediate quantity, and the rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act do not apply to the present case. The petitioners would abide by all the terms and conditions which the Court may impose. Hence, he prayed that the present petitions be allowed and the petitioners be released on bail.

6. Mr. Ajit Sharma, learned Deputy Advocate General for the respondent/State, submitted that the petitioners were found in possession of 986 grams of charas, which is close to a commercial quantity; such a quantity could not have been meant for self-consumption. Petitioner-Parveen Kumar was earlier involved in the commission of a similar offence, and the possibility of his committing a similar crime cannot be ruled out. Therefore, he prayed that the present petitions be dismissed.

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

8. The parameters for granting bail were considered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Ajwar v. Waseem (2024) 10 SCC 768 : 2024 SCC OnLine SC 974, wherein it was observed at page 783: -

“Relevant parameters for granting bail

26. While considering as to whether bail ought to be granted in a matter involving a seri