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

2026 Supreme(HP) 233

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA.
SANDEEP SHARMA, J.
Pardeep Kumar  - Petitioner
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh - Respondent
Cr.MP(M) No.257 of 2026
Decided on : 16.03.2026

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Bhairav Gupta, Advocate.
For the Respondent:Mr. Rajan Kahol, Additional Advocate General, with Mr. Ravi Chauhan and Mr. Anish Banshtu, Deputy Advocates General,
SI Vipan Kumar, Additional SHO PS Baddi, District Solan, HP present in person.

Confessional statements under Section 67 NDPS inadmissible against accused; no conscious possession means no Section 22 case; bail grantable in commercial quantity despite Section 37 if false implication via co-accused statement evident.

Headnote:(A) ND & PS Act - Sections 22, 29, 37 - BNSS, 2023 - Section 483 - Narcotics case - Recovery of commercial quantity of cough syrup containing codeine phosphate from room occupied by petitioner and co-accused - No conscious possession of petitioner; implication solely based on co-accused's statement under Section 67 ND & PS Act held inadmissible for trial as per Supreme Court in Tofan Singh - No case under Section 22; rigours of Section 37 not absolute bar to bail where false implication apparent and nothing to recover - Bail granted subject to conditions. (Paras 7, 8, 10)

(B) Bail principles - Presumption of innocence till guilt proved; normal rule bail not jail; consideration of no prima facie case, no tampering risk, first offender status; freedom paramount unless necessity dictates custody - Object of bail to secure trial attendance not punish. (Paras 11-15)

Facts of the case:
Police raided on secret information, recovered 360 bottles of cough syrup (14 labelled, 346 unlabelled) containing codeine from room leased in company name, occupied by petitioner (employee) and co-accused. Co-accused claimed bottles stacked by petitioner on company owner's askance. No record of these bottles in company production sent to destination; forensic confirmed narcotic content. Petitioner in custody since arrest; co-accused owners granted anticipatory bail.

Findings of Court:
Petitioner enlarged on bail on personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties; conditions imposed including attendance at trial, no tampering, no threats, no leaving jurisdiction.

Issues: Whether case under Sections 22/29 ND & PS Act made out absent conscious possession; admissibility of co-accused's confessional statement; applicability of Section 37 rigours for bail in commercial quantity; whether continued detention justified.

Ratio Decidendi: Confessional statements under Section 67 ND & PS Act inadmissible in trial; no recovery from petitioner's conscious possession precludes Section 22 liability; shared occupancy insufficient for complicity without evidence of manufacture/removal involvement; trial court to decide on totality of evidence; bail warranted where no recovery pending, false implication via inadmissible statement, and principles favour liberty pending trial.

Result: Bail petition allowed.

Table of Content
1. recovery of excess codeine syrup from co-accused room. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. occupancy implies liability under section 29 ndps. (Para 4)
3. no conscious possession; trial to determine manufacturing origin. (Para 5 , 6 , 7)
4. section 67 ndps confessions inadmissible per tofan singh. (Para 8 , 9)
5. bail under section 37 if falsely implicated; innocence presumed. (Para 10 , 11)
6. bail rule, jail exception; consider tampering risk. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15)
7. regular bail granted with conditions and caveats. (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19)

JUDGMENT :

SANDEEP SHARMA, J.

Bail petitioner, namely Pardeep Kumar, who is behind the bars since 11.12.2025, has approached this Court in the instant proceedings filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023, for grant of regular bail in case FIR No.301 dated 05.12.2025, under Sections 22 and 29 of ND & PS Act, registered at PS Baddi, District Solan, HP.

2. In terms of order dated 27.02.2026, respondent/State filed status report and SI Vipan Kumar, Additional SHO PS Baddi, District Solan, has come present along with record. Record perused and returned.

3. Close scrutiny of status report/ record reveals that on 05.12.2025, police, after having received secret information to the effect that person namely Prajwal Sharma, R/o Village Malookmajra, Morphin Road, near Bharat Petrol Pump, Baddi, indulges in illegal trade of narcotics, constituted a raiding party and allegedly recovered 360 bottles of Syrup namely Zing Cirex-T containing Triprolidine Hydrochloride and Codeine Phosphate Syrup in the presence of independent witnesses. Out of aforesaid 360 bottles, 14 bottles were having label of CSD Life sciences, whereas the remaining bottles were without any label. Since no plausible explanation ever came to be rendered on record qua possession of aforesaid bottles of cough syrup containing narcotic substance i.e. codeine phosphate, police, after having completed necessary codal formalities, lodged FIR detailed hereinabove against Prajwal Sharma, who allegedly during investigation disclosed that accommodation in which he along with Pardeep i.e. bail petitioner, resides, is in the name of CSD Life Sciences. He also disclosed to the Police that bottles recovered from him were stacked by the bail petitioner i.e. Pardeep on the askance of owner of CSD Life Sciences namely Vishal. On the basis of aforesaid statement given by the Prajwal Sharma, Police arrested bail petitioner, whereas owners of CSD Life Sciences namely Vishal and Sachin along with Production Manager Alok Dhar Dwivedi, approached the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Solan, by way of bail petition filed under Section 482 Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita for grant of anticipatory bail. Subsequently, afore persons approached this Court by way of Cr.MP(M) Nos.137, 182 and 222 of 2026 for grant of anticipatory bail and this Court vide order dated 06.03.2026, enlarged them on bail.

4. Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General, on instructions of Investigating officer, states that though nothing remains to be recovered from the bail-petitioner, but he has not disclosed information with regard to production of 360 bottles, which were otherwise found to be manufactured in excess, as per record, and were recovered from the room of bail petitioner and Prajwal Sharma. Mr. Kahol states that as per record of CSD Life Sciences, 360 bottles were not manufactured there, rather all the drugs manufactured in CSD Life Sciences were sent to Kanpur. He states that Investigation Agency has yet to find out from where 360 bottles in excess to particular batch were prepared and why they were lying in the room hired by the CSD Life Sciences. He states that though 360 bottles containing narcotic substance were not recovered from the conscious possession of the bail-petitioner, but he, being one of the occupant of the room, is liable to be prosecuted under Section 29 of ND & PS Act. He states that as per forensic report, all the bottles recovered from the room of em


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