The court ruled that the applicant's possession of contraband did not constitute a commercial quantity, allowing bail under conditions, emphasizing the presumption of innocence and prohibition of pre-trial punishment.

JUDGMENT :

Virender Singh, J.

Applicant-Ram Bahadur, has filed the present application, under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as the 'BNSS'), with a prayer to release him on bail, during the pendency of the trial, in case FIR No.5 of 2025, dated 24.01.2025, registered under Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘NDPS Act’), with Police Station Jubbal, District Shimla, H.P.

2. According to the applicant, he has falsely been arrayed as accused, in the above noted case, and has wrongly been arrested for allegedly possessing 667 grams of Charas.

3. As per the applicant, he is innocent person and has nothing to do with the contraband allegedly shown to have been recovered from his possession.

4. It is the further case of the applicant that he is residing, along with his wife, on the address, as mentioned, in the application, for the last more than 20-30 years and working in the orchard of Bittu Dhanta @ Mukesh.

5. According to the applicant, the contraband allegedly recovered from his possession does not fall within the definition of commercial quantity, as such, rigors of Section 37 are not applicable, in the present case.

6. As per the applicant, except the present case, no other case has been registered against him.

7. The applicant, has given certain undertakings, for which, he is ready to abide by, in case, ordered to be released, on bail, during the pendency of the trial.

8. On the basis of the above facts, a prayer has been made to allow the application.

9. When put to notice, the police has filed the status report disclosing therein, that on 24.01.2025, ASI Pramod Kumar, along with other police officials, was on patrolling duty and duty to detect the crime relating to excise and narcotics at Batargalu.

9.1. At about 5.00. p.m., the I.O., noticed a person coming on foot from Village Dhar, having rucksack, on his back. On seeing the Police vehicle, he got perplexed and made efforts to flee away from the spot. His activities raised suspicion in the mind of the I.O., as such, with the help of Police officials, he was nabbed.

9.2. On inquiry, the said person has disclosed his name as Ram Bahadur. Since, it was a secluded place, as such, Shri Kuldeep Pirta, Pradhan, Gram Panchayat Badhal, was requested to come to the spot, after apprising him about the situation of the spot.

9.3. In the presence of said Kuldeep Pirta, the rucksack, carried by Ram Bahadur (applicant), was searched and it was found containing 667 grams of black coloured stick shaped substance, which, on smell and on the basis of experience, as well as, on the disclosure made by accused, was found to be Charas.

9.4. Thereafter, the said contraband was taken into possession and rukka was sent to the Police Station for registration of the FIR. Accused person was arrested.

10. After completion of the codal formalities, the contraband, so recovered, was sent to SFSL Junga, from where, positive report has been received. Presently, the applicant is stated to be in judicial custody.

11. Highlighting the fact that the applicant is a Nepali citizen, a prayer has been made to dismiss the application.

12. Heard.

13. Merely, the fact that the applicant is a Nepali citizen, does not dis-entitle him from the relief, for which, he otherwise is entitled to, as, for such apprehension, reasonable conditions can be imposed, in case, he is ordered to be released on bail.

14. The contraband allegedly recovered from the possession of the applicant, does not fall within the definition of ‘commercial quantity’, as such, rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, are not applicable in the present case.

15. As per the status report, except the present case, no other case was found to have been registered against the applicant.

16. The applicant is in the judicial custody and this fact demonstrates that he is not required by the police for custodial interrogation. As such, no useful purpose would be served by