Possession of an intermediate quantity of narcotics does not guarantee bail; each case must be assessed on its own facts considering societal implications.

JUDGMENT :

Rakesh Kainthla, J.

The petitioner has filed the present petition for seeking regular bail. It has been asserted that the petitioner was arrested on 29.9.2023 for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 21 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (in short NDPS Act) registered vide FIR No. 131 of 2023, dated 29.9.2023, at Police Station Gagret, District Una, H.P. The prosecution case is false. The petitioner has been in custody since 29.9.2023. The charge sheet has been filed before the Court, and no fruitful purpose would be served by detaining the petitioner in custody. The petitioner had filed a bail petition earlier, which was dismissed on the ground that the petitioner has criminal antecedents and is likely to commit the offence in case of his release on bail. The rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act do not apply to the present case. The petitioner is an addict. He cannot be detained in custody till the conclusion of the trial; hence, it was prayed that the present petition be allowed and the petitioner be released on bail.

2. The petition is opposed by filing a status report asserting that the police party was on patrolling duty on 28.09.2023 when a secret information was received that a vehicle bearing registration No. HP-06A-6723 was transporting a huge quantity of Heroin. The police completed the codal formalities and associated two independent witnesses Munish Kumar and Aakash Thakur. The police stopped the Alto Car bearing registration no. HP-06A-6723 at about 8:20 p.m. The driver revealed his name as Akshay Kumar and another person sitting with him revealed his name as Sushil Kumar. The police searched the vehicle and recovered 22.04 grams of heroin. The police seized the heroin and arrested the occupants. The accused revealed that Heroin was purchased from Honey. The police arrested Honey. Seven (7) F.I.R.s have been registered against the petitioner. As per the result of the analysis, the total weight of the exhibit was found to be 22.040 grams, and the exhibit was a sample of Diacetyl morphine. The police prepared the challan after completion of the investigation and presented it to the Court. The matter was listed by the learned Trial Court on 10.1.2025 for the fixation of evidence.

3. I have heard Mr. Prashant Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Jitender Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General, for the respondent/State.

4. Mr. Prashant Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he was falsely implicated. There is a delay in the progress of the trial and the petitioner is entitled to bail on this ground; hence, he prayed that the present petition be allowed and the petitioner be released on bail.

5. Mr. Jitender Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General, for the respondent/State submitted that the earlier bail petition was dismissed by this Court and there is no change in the circumstances. The delay occurred due to the adjournments sought on behalf of the accused. The accused cannot take advantage of the delay being caused by him in the progress of the trial; hence, he prayed that the present petition be dismissed.

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

7. 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 as under page 783: -

“Relevant parameters for granting bail

26. While considering as to whether bail ought to be granted in a matter involving a serious criminal offence, the Court must consider relevant factors like the nature of the accusations made against the accused, the manner in which the crime is alleged to have been committed, the gravity of the offence, the role attributed to the accused, the criminal antecedents of the accused, the probability of tampering of the witnesses and repeating the offence, if the ac