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) 1066

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA 
RANJAN SHARMA, J.
Tilak Raj - Petitioner
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh - Respondent
Cr.MP(M) No. 1462 of 2024
Decided On : 10-01-2025



Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Vijender Katoch.
For the Respondent: Mr. Pratyush Sharma, Addl. A.G.

Prolonged incarceration and lack of evidence necessitate bail, emphasizing personal liberty and the right to a speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution.

Headnote:(A) Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - Section 483 - Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act - Sections 20 and 29 - MOTOR VEHICLES ACT - Section 181 - Bail petition for the accused seeking bail after 1 year and 8 months of incarceration for selling cannabis - Court noted allegations were false, and there was no fruitful purpose in continuing custody. (Paras 6, 11, and 17)

(B) Granting Bail - Court reviews the nature and gravity of accusations, severity of punishment, character of accused, and likelihood of obstruction in justice. The Court must balance individual liberty against societal interests. (Paras 6 and 18)

(C) Right to Speedy Trial - Prolonged incarceration and lack of progress in trial justifies granting bail under Article 21 of the Constitution. (Paras 12 and 18)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner, accused of possessing 1.509 Kg of cannabis, denied allegations, claiming false implication. After 1 year and 8 months of custody, the investigation was complete, and delay was not attributable to him.

Findings of Court:
No reasonable grounds to believe the petitioner guilty; there was considerable delay in trial, warranting bail.

Issues: Whether allegations of selling cannabis hold merit and the impact of prolonged incarceration on granting bail.

Ratio Decidendi: The Court applied the principle that bail is the rule, jail is an exception, and emphasized the urgency of resolving the matter promptly to uphold constitutional rights on personal liberty and speedy trials.

Result: Bail granted to the petitioner under stringent conditions.

Table of Content
1. bail application filed with claims of false allegations requires careful scrutiny. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5)
2. legal precedents underline that bail is a right, not a punishment. (Para 6 , 8 , 12)
3. assessment of incarceration duration and absence of prima facie case affects bail decisions. (Para 9 , 10 , 11)
4. court's order balances legal rights, societal needs, and mandates bail with conditions. (Para 24 , 25 , 26)

JUDGMENT :

Ranjan Sharma, J.

Bail petitioner, Tilak Raj [being in custody19.05.2023] has approached this Court, under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 [hereinafter referred to as BNSS ] seeking regular bail originating from the FIR No. 98 of 2023 dated 19.05.2023, registered with Police Station Baijnath, District Kangra [H.P.], under Sections 20 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (referred to as the NDPS Act) and under Section181 of the MOTOR VEHICLES ACT .

FACTUAL MATRIX

2. Case set up by Mr. Vijender Katoch, Learned Counsel is that prosecution case is that on 18.5.2023 at around 09.45 p.m, while the Police Party headed by Inspector Gaurav Bhardwaj alongwith other Police Officials were on patrolling duty near GMS Kyori, a secret information was received that two persons were selling Charas near Jagarkot Ajay Pal Devta Temple. On receiving this information, Inspector Gaurav Bharadwaj and two Independent witnesses namely Pradhan Shiv Kumar and Up-Pradhan Rovan Lal reached village Sail and thereafter, IO Gaurav Bharadwaj in his private car left for Jagarkot Ajay Pal Devta Temple and the Independent witness also went to said temple spot in separate vehicle. On reaching Jagarkot Ajay Pal Devta Temple, at around 10.20 p.m, police party found one white Eon Car, without registration, occupied by three persons and one black pulsar motorcycle bearing No HP-33-7650 was found parked. On inquiry, the person sitting on driver seat disclosed his name Tilak Raj, the person sitting on co-driver seat revealed his name as Mehar Singh and person sitting on rear seat disclosed his name as Missu Ram. On checking of Eon Car, the police found one carry bag printed with green and red flowers from underneath the drivers seat and after untying bag, the police recovered sticks like black substance i.e. Charas-Cannabis and upon weighing it came out to be 1.509 Kgs. The recovered Charas was kept in same carry bag and was sealed with eight seals and documents of Car and Motorcycle were also seized and after completing all the codal formalities, the rukka was sent leading to registration of FIR.

2(i). The matter was Investigated and the Challan was presented before the jurisdictional Court. It is averred that the allegations were totally false and the bail petitioner [Tilak Raj], was not connected with the alleged offence. It was stated that the petitioner was falsely implicated. It is submitted that nothing is to be recovered from him and no fruitful purpose will be served by keeping him in judicial custody.

2(ii). Apart from this, the bail petitioner has given certain undertakings that he shall participate in the investigation and trial thereafter and shall not cause any inducement, threat or promise to any witness or person acquainted with the case and shall not tamper with the evidence in any manner. It is averred that in case of release, the bail petitioner shall abide by all other conditions which may be imposed by this Court.

2(iii). It is further averred that the bail petitioner earlier moved an application for bail before this Court [Cr.MP(M) No.729 of 2024], and on receipt of Status Report, the same was withdrawn by the bail petitioner on22.04.2024 [Annexure P-1].

2(iv). After withdrawal of the bail on 22.04.2024 Annexure P-1], the bail petitioner came across Forensic -Chemical Analysis Report and it is contented that entire contraband was not made homogenous as per Section 52 -A of NDPS Act and therefore the petitioner could not be presumed or implicated for commercial quantit

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