Bail should not be denied based on inadmissible evidence; the evaluation of admissible evidence is paramount in bail considerations.

JUDGMENT :

RAKESH KAINTHLA, J.

1. The petitioner has filed the present petition for seeking regular bail in FIR No. 204 of 2025, dated 22.09.2025, registered for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 20, 25, and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act), at Police Station Sundernagar, District Mandi, H.P.

2. It has been asserted that, as per the prosecution, the police had set up a nakka at Pungh Fourlane on 22.09.2025. They stopped a car bearing registration No. UP-16AX-2143, in which five people were travelling. The police searched the vehicle and recovered a backpack containing 1.74 kilograms of charas. The police arrested the occupants of the vehicles and seized the charas. The petitioner was not apprehended from the spot, and no contraband was recovered from his possession. He was named by the co-accused during the interrogation, who claimed that he had transferred Rs. 50,000/- to the petitioner’s account for purchasing charas. The police arrested the petitioner on 04.11.2025. The disclosure statement made by the co-accused to the police is inadmissible in evidence. There is no other evidence against the petitioner. The investigation is complete, and the petitioner’s custody is not required. No fruitful purpose would be served by detaining the petitioner in custody. The petitioner would abide by all the terms and conditions that the Court may impose. Hence, the petition.

3. The petition is opposed by filing a status report asserting that the police party had set up a nakka at Pungh four-lane and were checking the vehicles on 22.09.2025. They intercepted a vehicle bearing registration No. UP16AX-2143. The driver and occupants of the vehicle got frightened after seeing the police. The police associated Kuldeep Kumar and Mukesh Kumar as independent witnesses. The police inquired about the names of the occupants of the vehicle. The driver identified himself as Devayas Patel. The person sitting beside him identified himself as Nakul Mittal, and the persons sitting in the rear seat identified themselves as Arnav Chauhan, Saksham Bharti and Rohit Kumar. The police searched the vehicle and recovered a carry bag containing 1.74 kilograms of charas. The police seized the charas and arrested the occupants of the vehicle. The charas was sent to SFSL, Junga, and as per the report of analysis, it was confirmed to be a sample of charas. The occupants revealed during interrogation that they had handed over Rs. 5000/- each to Kashin Kashyap, who had also accompanied the accused on his motorcycle. They identified the room where they had stayed in Kullu. The bank details showed that an amount of Rs. 50,000/- was transferred from the account of Kashin’s mother to the petitioner’s bank account. The petitioner’s bank account details showed a receipt of Rs. 50,000/-. The police arrested the petitioner, who confirmed the sale of charas. The charas was meant for the sale to students. The investigation is complete, and the charge sheet has been filed. Hence, the status report.

4. I have heard Ms Ruchika Khachi, Advocate, learned vice counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Lokender Kutlehria, learned Additional Advocate General for the respondent/State.

5. Ms Ruchika Khachi, Advocate, learned vice counsel for the petitioner, submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he was falsely implicated based on the statement made by the co-accused, which is inadmissible in evidence. The investigation is complete, and the charge sheet has been filed. No fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner in custody. Hence, she prayed that the present petition be allowed and the petitio