IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
VIRENDER SINGH, J.
Govind Singh - Appellant
Versus
State of H.P. - Respondent
Cr. MP(M) No. 298 of 2025
Decided on : 03-03-2025
(A) Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita - Section 482 - Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act - Section 21 and 29 - Bail application - Applicant apprehending arrest in a narcotics case - Allegations of false implication and prior criminal history - Court emphasized the need to balance individual liberty with societal interests - Previous cases against applicant raised concerns about potential re-offending. (Paras 1, 6, 9, 10)
(B) Interpretation of NDPS Act - The provisions must be interpreted literally to serve the Act's purpose of combating drug trafficking and protecting public health. (Paras 6)
Facts of the case:
The applicant sought bail in a case involving narcotics, claiming false implication. The police report indicated prior involvement in similar offenses and a connection to the accused found with heroin. (Paras 2, 5.5, 5.9)
Findings of Court:
The applicant's prior criminal history and the nature of the allegations warranted denial of bail, as releasing him could endanger society. (Paras 10)
Issues: Whether the applicant should be granted bail considering his previous offenses and the potential risk to society. (Paras 9)
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the applicant's history of drug-related offenses justified the denial of bail, emphasizing the need to protect society from further harm. (Paras 10)
Result: Bail application dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
Virender Singh, J.
The applicant has filed the present application, under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (hereinafter referred to as ‘the BNSS’) in case FIR No. 19 of 2025, dated 11.2.2025, registered under Section 29 of the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (hereinafter referred to as ‘the NDPS Act”) with Police Station, Rampur Bushehr, District Shimla, H.P.
2. The applicant has sought the indulgence of this Court to direct the Investigating Officer/Police, to release him on bail, in the event of his arrest, in the above-mentioned case, as, he is apprehending his arrest, in the said case.
3. It is the case of the applicant that he has been falsely named as accused in this case, as he has nothing to do with this case.
4. On the basis of above facts, Mr. Sanjeev Bhushan, Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. Sparsh Bhushan, Advocate, has given certain undertakings, on behalf of the applicant, for which, he is ready to abide by, in case, directions are issued to the Police/I.O., under Section 482 of the BNSS.
5. On 19.2.2025, while issuing notice to the respondent-State, interim protection was granted to the applicant and the matter was adjourned for 24.2.2025.
5.1 On 24.2.2025, the Police filed status report, disclosing therein that on 11.2.2025, HC Gaurav Jishtu No. 172, Incharge, Detection Cell Team, Sub Division, Rampur has submitted a ruqua, disclosing therein that on 11.2.2025, he, alongwith other police officials had left the office, for collecting information regarding Excise and Narcotics, and entered the rapat in the relevant register.
5.2 When, they were on their way to Nagoli, Dakolad, New Bus Stand, Khaneri, then, at about 3:43 a.m., they found a person sitting on parapet near Field Hostel. Since, it was odd time of the night, as such, the I.O. developed suspicion in his mind. The I.O. directed the driver to stop the vehicle, upon which, the said person, all of a sudden, stood up and threw something from his pocket towards the lower side of the road and tried to flee away. Thereafter, he was nabbed by the Police and the thing, which he had thrown, was also lifted and he was inquired about the said thing. But, he could not give any satisfactory answer and got perplexed. The I.O. tried to associate the drivers/occupants of the vehicles, which were found passing from that place, but, no one was ready to be associated. Thereafter, Const. Ravinder Singh and Const. Mahinder Singh were associated in the investigation as independent witnesses. In the presence of independent witnesses, name and address of the aforesaid person was inquired. On inquiry, he disclosed his name as Sahil, S/o Padam Lal, VPO Bari, Tehsil Nichar, District Kinnaur, HP.
5.3 In the presence of independent witnesses, the suspected thing thrown by accused Sahil, was opened, which was found to be transparent polythene envelope. On opening the same, a granule shaped light yellow coloured substance was found, which, on checking, was found to be chitta/heroin. On weighment, the same was found to be 6.13 grams.
5.4 On the basis of ruqua, FIR was registered and contraband was taken into possession and accused Sahil was arrested.
5.5 During inquiry, accused Sahil has disclosed that he is studying in BA-II, in Rampur College. He has further disclosed that he is having rented accommodation at Nogli Devtan. His father is stated to be Mason by profession and he has four siblings. He has further revealed that his friends from village work in Mohali Network Marketing. He has further disclosed that he has started residing with him and he had prepared 15 sticks of cannabis. He was nabbed by Police on 27.12.2024 by Panchkula Police, for possessing 100 grams Charas, and the case under the provisions of NDPS Act was registered against him. He is stated to have remained in judicial custody for about one month. On 8.2.2025, he had gone to attend the Court proceedings. Thereafter, on 9.2.2025, at about 11:30 a.m. his brother-in-law Govind Singh (a
AI
The court emphasized that bail should be denied when the applicant has a history of drug offenses, balancing individual liberty against societal safety.
Bail cannot be denied as punishment; presumption of innocence remains until proven guilty, necessitating fair consideration for bail applications.
Bail granted in NDPS case involving non-commercial quantity contraband: Section 37 rigors inapplicable; presumption of innocence persists despite prior pending cases; no purpose in indefinite custody....
Bail must not be denied as a punitive measure; presumption of innocence prevails and applicants are entitled to bail as per parity with co-accused.
Pre-trial punishment is prohibited, and the presumption of innocence must be upheld, allowing bail when no commercial quantity of contraband is involved.
Courts must strictly apply Section 37 of the NDPS Act requiring proof of non-guilt and lack of risk to public safety for bail eligibility.
The court emphasized that under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, bail cannot be granted unless the Public Prosecutor is given an opportunity to oppose and the court is satisfied of the accused's non-guilt....
In NDPS commercial quantity cases, bail denied absent satisfaction of twin Section 37 conditions: reasonable grounds (substantial probable causes) for non-guilt and no likelihood of reoffending; fina....
Concealment of prior criminal cases disqualifies an applicant from bail under the NDPS Act, despite the completion of the investigation.
Bail in NDPS commercial quantity cases mandates court satisfaction of twin conditions under Section 37: reasonable grounds of non-guilt based on substantial evidence and no likelihood of reoffending;....
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.