SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(HP) 843

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA 
RAKESH KAINTHLA, J.
Kunal Kumar - Appellant 
Versus
State of H.P. - Respondent
Cr. MP(M) No. 2362 of 2024
Decided on : 03-01-2025


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. K.S. Gill, Advocate.
For the Respondent: Mr. Lokender Kutlehria

The court emphasized that possession of narcotics and prior criminal history are critical factors against granting bail, and the principle of parity must consider the role of the accused.

Headnote:

(A) Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act - Sections 21 and 29 - Bail application - Petitioner arrested for possession of 6.21 grams of heroin - Co-accused released on bail - Petitioner in judicial custody since 26.01.2024 - Principle of parity invoked - Rigours of Section 37 not applicable due to small quantity - Previous FIRs against petitioner indicate criminal antecedents - Court emphasized that mere possession does not equate to entitlement for bail based on parity - Dismissed bail application. (Paras 1, 9, 13, 15)

(B) Bail - Parameters for granting bail - The Supreme Court has laid down that the fundamental purpose of bail is to ensure the accused's presence during investigation and trial, and conditions must be reasonable and related to this objective. (Paras 7, 12)

(C) Criminal Antecedents - The court must consider the criminal history of the accused when deciding on bail, especially if there is a likelihood of re-offending. (Paras 13, 14)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner was arrested for possessing 6.21 grams of heroin while traveling on a bus. The co-accused was released on bail, but the petitioner has prior FIRs against him under the ND&PS Act.

Findings of Court:
The petitioner was found in actual possession of heroin, and his criminal history indicates a likelihood of re-offending, thus not entitled to bail.

Issues: Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail based on the principle of parity and the implications of his criminal antecedents.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that possession of narcotics and prior criminal history are significant factors against granting bail, emphasizing that parity must consider the role of the accused.

Result: Petition dismissed.

JUDGMENT :

Rakesh Kainthla, J.

The petitioner has filed the present petition for seeking regular bail. It has been asserted that the petitioner was arrested in FIR No. 05 of 2024, dated 26.01.2024, for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 21 & 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (hereinafter referred to as ND&PS Act) registered at Police Station Parwanoo, District Solan, H.P. As per the prosecution, the police checked the bus bearing registration No. CH-01GA-8195. The petitioner and the co-accused were found occupying seats No. 35 and 34, respectively. The petitioner had acarry bag, and police found 6.21 grams of heroin while checking it. The police arrested the petitioner and the co-accused. The petitioner has been in judicial custody since 26.01.2024. The co- accused has been released on bail. The petitioner is entitled to bail on the principle of parity. The quantity of heroin stated to have been recovered from the possession of the petitioner is just above the small quantity, and the rigours of Section 37 of the ND&PS Act do not apply to the present case. The petitioner had earlier filed a bail petition, bearing Cr.MP No. 1101 of 2024, which was dismissed as withdrawn on 23.07.2024. The petitioner has no criminal antecedents. He would abide by the terms and conditions, which the Court may impose.; therefore, 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 received a secret information on 26.01.2024 regarding the transportation of heroin by Kunal and Prakash, who were travelling in the bus bearing registration No. CH-01GA-8145. The police completed the formalities and intercepted the bus at 6:50 PM. The police checked the passengers in the presence of the driver and the conductor. The petitioner was occupying seat No. 34 and had a carry bag with him. Prakash Chand was occupying seat No. 35. The police checked the petitioner’s carry bag and found 6.21 grams of heroin. The police seized the heroin and arrested the petitioner and Prakash Chand. The heroin was sent to SFSL, and the result of the analysis confirmed it to be heroin. FIR No. 191 of 2019 dated 10.09.2019 for the commission of an offence punishable under Section 21 of the ND&PS Act and FIR No. 221 of 2022 dated 30.10.2022 for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 21 & 29 of ND&PS Act are registered against the petitioner in Police Station Sadar, Solan. The challan has been filed before the Court and is listed before learned Additional Sessions Judge Solan on 02.01.2025 for consideration on charge.

3. I have heard Mr. K.S. Gill, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Lokender Kutlehria, learned Additional Advocate General for the respondent/State.

4. Mr. K.S. Gill, learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he was falsely implicated. Co-accused Prakash Chand has already been released on bail, and the petitioner is entitled to bail on the principle of parity. Hence, he prayed that the present petition be allowed and the petitioner be released on bail.

5. Mr Lokender Kutlehria, learned Additional Advocate General for the respondent/State, submitted that the petitioner was found in possession of a carry bag containing heroin. The co-accused was merely sitting on seat No. 35, which is located adjacent to seat No. 34. There is no parity between the petitioner and the co- accused. Therefore, 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 Ramratan v. State of M.P., 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3068, wherein it was observed as under: -

“12. The fundamental purpose of bail is to ensure the accused's presence during the investigation and trial. Any conditions imposed must be r

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top