IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
VIRENDER SINGH, J.
Rahul Thakur - Applicant
Versus
State of H.P. – Respondent
Cr. MP(M) No. 5 of 2025
Decided On : 11-03-2025
(A) Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - Section 483 - Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act - Section 21 - Bail application filed by the applicant who claimed to be falsely implicated and in judicial custody since 6.7.2024 - Previous bail applications dismissed - No conviction in prior cases - Contraband found does not constitute 'commercial quantity' - Rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act not applicable. (Paras 1, 12, 14)
(B) Bail - Conditions for granting bail - The court must not use bail as punishment and should consider the applicant's circumstances and the nature of the offense. (Paras 12, 15)
Facts of the case:
The applicant was arrested for possession of chitta/heroin, weighing 10.16 grams, during a police patrol based on a tip-off. He has previous cases under the NDPS Act but no convictions. (Paras 1, 10.3, 13)
Findings of Court:
The applicant is entitled to bail as the contraband does not fall under 'commercial quantity', and his continued custody is not justified. (Paras 14, 16)
Issues: Whether the applicant should be granted bail despite previous cases and the nature of the contraband. (Paras 12, 14)
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that mere registration of cases does not imply habitual offending, and bail should not be denied as a punitive measure. (Paras 13, 14)
Result: Bail application allowed, with conditions. (Para 13)
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. 116 of 2024, dated 6.7.2024, under Sections 21 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act (hereinafter referred to as ‘the NDPS Act”) registered with Police Station Sadar Solan, District Solan, 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 he is in judicial custody w.e.f. 6.7.2024. As such, it cannot be inferred that his custody is any longer required by the Police.
4. The applicant has averred that he permanent resident of District Mandi, H.P.
5. The applicant had earlier tried his luck, by moving bail application No. 103-S/22 of 2024, before the learned Special Judge-II, Solan, District Solan, H.P. which was dismissed, on 6.8.2024.
6. Thereafter, he has moved another bail application bearing No. 91-S/22 of 2024, before the Court of learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Fast Track Special Court (POCSO), Solan, H.P., which was dismissed on 10.10.2024.
7. The applicant has also given details of two cases, which have already been registered against him, apart from the present matter, as under:
i) FIR No. 19 of 2020, dated 20.2.2020, under Section 21 of the NDPS Act;
ii) 18 of 2024, dated 15.3.2024, under sections 21 and 29 of the NDPS Act.
8. The applicant has given certain undertakings, for which, he is ready to abide by, in case, ordered to be released on bail.
9. On all these submissions, Mr. Anirudh Sharma, learned counsel appearing for the applicant, has prayed that the bail application may kindly be allowed.
10. When, put to notice, Police has filed the status report, disclosing therein that on 6.7.2024, HC Virender Kumar No. 13 submitted a ruqua, disclosing therein, that he alongwith other police officials, was on patrolling duty and was present near Police Line Gate No. 1 on four-lane road. At about 12:50 a.m in the midnight, he received a secret information regarding the fact that vehicle No. HP 03C-6616 (Honda Amaze) has been parked near Income Tax Office, in which, one person, namely, Rahul Thakur, is sitting, who is doing business of selling/supplying chitta/heroin, and in case, said vehicle is checked, large quantity of contraband could be recovered.
10.1 On the basis of said information, the I.O. complied with the provisions of Section 42 (2) of the NDPS Act. Thereafter, he associated two police officials in the investigation of the case and reached at the spot. When, they reached at the spot, they noticed that on the lower side of the road, the said car was parked. When, the Police disclosed their identity, the person, sitting in the car got perplexed.
10.2 On inquiry, the person, sitting in the car has disclosed his name as Rahul Thakur (applicant). Thereafter, the vehicle was searched. On searching the vehicle, in the cup holder, a transparent plastic pouch was found, which was found containing a light yellow coloured substance, which was found to be chitta/heroin. On weighment, the same was found to be 10.16 grams.
10.3 Other codal formalities were completed. The accused was arrested. The report was sent to SFSL, Junga, from where, a positive report has been received.
10.4 Criminal history of the applicant has also been reiterated, in the status report.
10.5 Investigation, in the present case, is stated to be complete, as, Challan is stated to have been filed and the same is stated to be pending adjudication in the Court of learned Special Judge-II, Solan, H.P., wherein Charges are stated to have been framed and the case is now stated to be fixed for PWs, on 2.4.2025.
10.6 Lastly, it has been submitted that the applicant is very clever person, and in case, he is ordered to be released on bail, he may again indulge in the same activities.
11. On the basis of above facts, a prayer has b
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 granted bail, emphasizing the presumption of innocence and the lack of necessity for continued custody after investigation completion.
The court granted bail based on the presumption of innocence, noting that the quantity of contraband did not invoke stricter bail provisions.
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....
Bail cannot be denied as punishment; presumption of innocence remains until proven guilty, and non-commercial quantity of contraband allows for bail under NDPS Act.
Pre-trial punishment is prohibited; bail granted based on insufficient evidence and prior acquittals.
Pre-trial punishment is prohibited; bail may be granted when the contraband does not constitute commercial quantity, ensuring the applicant's rights are protected.
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 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 court ruled that the applicant is entitled to bail as the contraband does not constitute commercial quantity, and pre-trial punishment is prohibited.
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.