Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Virender Singh, J.
Amar Bahadur - Applicant
Vs.
State of Himachal Pradesh - Respondent
CrMP(M) No.569 of 2025
Decided On : 28-03-2025
(A) Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - Section 483 - Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act - Section 18 and 37 - Bail application - Applicant sought bail on grounds of innocence and health issues, claiming investigation is complete - Police opposed bail, citing possession of commercial quantity of opium and potential for reoffending - Court emphasized mandatory twin conditions under Section 37 for granting bail, namely, reasonable belief of innocence and likelihood of not committing further offences - Previous bail applications were dismissed based on similar grounds. (Paras 1, 3, 20, 30, 33)
(B) Bail - Standards for granting - Under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, the court must determine if there are reasonable grounds for believing the accused is not guilty and will not commit further offences while on bail - The burden of proof lies with the applicant. (Paras 20, 21)
Facts of the case:
The applicant was arrested for allegedly possessing 2.890 kg of opium, with the investigation completed and charge-sheet filed. He claimed health issues and innocence, while the police highlighted the nature of the offence and potential risk of reoffending.
Findings of Court:
The applicant failed to satisfy the twin conditions under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, leading to the dismissal of the bail application.
Issues: The court addressed whether the applicant met the criteria for bail under Section 37 of the NDPS Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the applicant did not fulfill the mandatory requirements under Section 37, which necessitates a finding of reasonable grounds for believing in the applicant's innocence and that he would not commit further offences while on bail.
Result: Bail application dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
Virender Singh, J.
By way of the present application, filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘BNSS’), applicant-Amar Bahadur has sought his release, on bail, during the pendency of the trial, in case FIR No.62 of 2024, dated 28.08.2024, registered under Section 18 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘NDPS Act’), with Police Station Chirgaon, District Shimla, H.P.
2. According to the applicant, he is innocent person and has falsely been implicated, in this case, at the instance of the police.
3. As per applicant, he has been arrested on 28.08.2024 by the police, in this case, for allegedly possessing contraband, weighing 2.890 kg of opium.
3. It is the case of the applicant that the investigation, in the present case, is complete, the charge- sheet has been filed in the competent Court of law and the case is now listed for 01.05.2025 for prosecution evidence. All these facts have been pleaded to show that the custodial interrogation of the applicant is no longer required by the police.
4. According to the applicant, he had earlier tried his luck by moving similar application, before the Court of learned Special Judge, Shimla, District Shimla, Himachal Pradesh. However, the same was dismissed vide order dated 13.01.2025.
5. It is the further case of the applicant that the pre-trial punishment is prohibited under the law.
6. Apart from this, it has also been pleaded that the applicant is suffering from Tuberculosis. In this regard, the documentary proof has also been annexed with the application. All these facts have been pleaded to show that in case, the applicant is ordered to be kept in the judicial custody, his health would further deteriorate.
7. According to the applicant, except the present case, no other case has been registered against him.
8. To buttress her contention, learned counsel for the applicant has relied upon the decisions of this Court in CrMP(M) No.107 of 2025, titled as ‘Dhan Bahadur Budha Vs. State of H.P.’, decided on 05.02.2024, CrMP(M) No.1894 of 2023, titled as ‘Dabe Ram Vs. State of H.P.’, decided on 01.09.2023, CrMP(M) No.2355 of 2023, titled as ‘Parvesh Saini Vs. State of H.P.’, decided on 06.10.2023 and CrMP(M) No.1061 of 2023, titled as ‘Relu Ram Vs. State of H.P.’, decided on 15.05.2023.
9. Apart from this, learned counsel for the applicant has given certain undertakings, on behalf of the applicant, for which, the applicant is ready to abide by, in case, ordered to be released on bail, during the pendency of the trial.
10. On the basis of above facts, Mrs. Suman Thakur, Advocate, appearing for the applicant, has prayed that the present bail application may be allowed.
11. When, put to notice, police has filed the status report, disclosing therein, that on 28.08.2024, SI/SHO Amit Sharma, Police Station Chirgaon, along with other police officials, had left the Police Station for traffic checking and duty to detect crime relating to excise and narcotics.
12. It is the case of the police that when, IO, along with other police officials, at about 02:20 pm, was on patrolling duty from Badiara to Sima side, then, one kilometer away from Sima, he noticed a person, coming from Sima side. The said person was walking towards Badiara. He was having a carry bag, made of golden coloured sack. The said person had also worn a mask, who, on seeing the police vehicle, turned back and tried to run away towards hill side, upon which, SI/SHO directed the driver to stop the vehicle and with the help of police officials, he has been nabbed. The said person was found to be perplexed. When, IO enquired about the contents of carry bag, which he was carrying in his hand, then, he got more perplexed and could not give any satisfactory answer.
13. Thereafter, the name and address of the said person were enquired, who, on enquiry, disclosed his name as Amar Bahadur (applicant). IO developed a suspicion that in the carry ba
The court emphasized that under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, bail can only be granted if there are reasonable grounds for believing the accused is not guilty and not likely to commit further offences.
The court emphasized that under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, bail can only be granted if there are reasonable grounds to believe the accused is not guilty and unlikely to reoffend.
The court emphasized that under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, bail can only be granted if there are reasonable grounds for believing the accused is not guilty and unlikely to commit further offences.
The court emphasized that under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, bail can only be granted if there are reasonable grounds to believe the accused is not guilty and unlikely to commit further offences.
The court emphasized that under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, bail can only be granted if there are reasonable grounds for believing the accused is not guilty and unlikely to reoffend.
The court emphasized that bail under the NDPS Act requires satisfying mandatory conditions, including reasonable grounds for believing the accused is not guilty and not likely to commit further offen....
The court emphasized the mandatory conditions under Section 37 of the NDPS Act for granting bail, requiring reasonable grounds for believing the accused is not guilty and assurance against further of....
The court held that bail for offences involving commercial quantities of narcotics requires strict adherence to Section 37 of the NDPS Act, emphasizing the necessity of satisfying specific conditions....
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 can only be granted if there are reasonable grounds for believing the accused is not guilty and unlikely to commit further offenses.
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
