Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
BIPIN CHANDER NEGI, J.
Rishabh Negi - Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh - Respondent
Cr. MP(M) No.562 of 2025
Decided on : 22-05-2025
(A) Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - Section 483 - Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Sections 21 & 29 - Bail application filed for regular bail in connection with an FIR for drug-related offenses - The petitioner was arrested with an intermediate quantity of contraband - Judicial discretion exercised in favor of bail due to lack of apprehension of fleeing or tampering with evidence. (Paras 1, 11, 13)
(B) Bail - The object of bail is to secure attendance at trial, not punitive - Personal liberty is a fundamental right that should only be curtailed when necessary. (Paras 10, 11)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner was arrested on 16.12.2024 for possessing 10.23 grams of Heroin found in a vehicle he owned. The investigation is complete, and the petitioner is in judicial custody. (Paras 6, 7)
Findings of Court:
The court found that the petitioner is not likely to flee or tamper with evidence, allowing bail with conditions to ensure attendance at trial. (Paras 11, 13)
Issues: The main issues included the nature of the evidence and the potential for the petitioner to flee or tamper with evidence. (Paras 8, 12)
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that personal liberty is a precious right and that bail should be granted unless there are compelling reasons against it. (Paras 10, 11)
Result: Bail application allowed; petitioner to be released on bail with conditions.
JUDGMENT :
Bipin Chander Negi, J.
The present bail petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) for grant of regular bail, arising out of FIR No.51/2024 dated 16.12.2024, registered at Police Station, Deha, District Shimla, Himachal Pradesh, for an offence punishable under Sections 21 &29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.
2. ASI Sheetal Prakash, I/O Police Station, Deha, District Shimla, is present along with record. Status report stands filed. The same is taken on record.
3. Status report perused. I have heard learned counsel for the parties.
4. The incident, in the case at hand is dated 16.12.2024. On the said date, the Police party concerned was on patrolling duty in an area Balag-Naina. One of the objective of the Police party was to check the drug menace in the aforesaid area. At about 8:15 a.m., Police party, in the case at hand reached Balag Nullah. At that particular point in time, one white coloured car was parked on the side of the road. The car was facing towards Sainj. The car was an Alto K10 make bearing number HP-10-1414. There were three people who were sitting inside the car.
5. Upon inquiry by the Police party, as to why the car was parked in solitude, they got perplexed and could not assign any satisfactory reason. Foul smell was emanating from the car. On inquiry, the Driver of the car disclosed his name to be Ankush. The bail petitioner was sitting in the co-driver seat. An individual named Lucky Thakur was sitting on the rear seat.
6. On search of the vehicle, one packet kept underneath the mat was recovered from the seat adjacent to the seat of the Driver. The contraband recovered was found to be Heroin. The weight of the contraband was found to be 10.23 grams. The bail petitioner was arrested on 16.12.2024 and is presently in judicial custody.
7. Challan in the case stands filed on 13.02.2025. Investigation in the case at hand is complete. Nothing is to be recovered from the bail petitioner. The quantity of the contraband involved is an intermediate quantity. The vehicle from which the contraband was recovered is owned by the bail petitioner.
8. In coming to the determination that whether the party, if admitted to bail, would appear to take trial, three elements need to be kept in mind, namely the charge, the nature of evidence by which it is supported and the punishment to which the party would be liable, if convicted. At the time of deciding a bail application, a detailed discussion of evidence, so collected and produced by the prosecution is to be avoided as it may cause prejudice either to the case of the prosecution or to the case of the bail petitioner. Guilt is to be ascertained at the trial.
9. The consequences of pre-trial incarceration are grave. A person presumed innocent is subjected to psychological and physical deprivations of jail. Further, a jailed individual is prevented from contributing to the preparation of his defence. The burden of his detention falls heavily on the innocent members of his family.
10. The object of bail is to secure the attendance of the accused person at his trial by reasonable amount of bail. The object of bail is neither punitive nor preventative.
11. Personal liberty is a very precious fundamental right. The same is to be curtailed only when it becomes imperative, according to the peculiar facts and circumstances of each case. Punishment begins after conviction. Nothing unfavourable has been stated in the status report qua the social circumstances of the petitioner, whereby it can be made out that the petitioner is likely to betray the confidence that the Court may place in him to turn out to take justice at the hands of the Court. As per the status report, bail petitioner is stated to be a resident of Village Near Poly-technical College, Tehsil Rohru, District Shimla. In order to ensure his presence at trial stringent conditions can be imposed while granting bail.
12. The respondent-State has not
The court emphasized that bail is a means to secure attendance at trial, and personal liberty should only be curtailed when necessary, reflecting the presumption of innocence.
The court ruled that bail should be granted when no contraband is found in possession, emphasizing the presumption of innocence and the need for a direct nexus between the accused and the alleged cri....
Bail is granted when pre-trial incarceration is not justified, especially if no contraband is found in possession of the accused, emphasizing the presumption of innocence.
The court emphasized the presumption of innocence and the necessity of judicial discretion in granting bail, particularly in cases involving commercial quantities of contraband.
Bail is granted based on the presumption of innocence, absence of prior criminal history, and lack of risk of flight or witness tampering.
Personal liberty is a fundamental right, and bail should be granted unless necessary to ensure attendance at trial, with conditions imposed to prevent tampering with evidence.
Personal liberty is a fundamental right that should only be curtailed when necessary, and bail should secure attendance at trial without being punitive.
The court granted bail based on the presumption of innocence, noting that the quantity of contraband did not invoke stricter bail provisions.
Bail cannot be denied as punishment; the absence of prior convictions and the nature of contraband are crucial in granting bail under the NDPS Act.
The court ruled that the applicant is entitled to bail as the contraband does not constitute commercial quantity, and pre-trial punishment is prohibited.
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
