Bail denied in NDPS commercial quantity case as vehicle occupants prima facie in conscious possession of contraband; twin conditions under Section 37 not satisfied despite trial delay.

JUDGMENT :

Rakesh Kainthla, J.

The petitioner has filed the present petition for seeking regular bail in FIR No. 150 of 2025, dated 14.09.2025, registered at Police Station Ghumarwin, District Bilaspur, H.P, for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 20 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (hereinafter referred to as NDPS Act).

2. It has been asserted that the police had recovered 1.30 kgs of charas from the car of the main accused. The petitioner was arrested based on the suspicion that he was involved in the commission of the crime. The allegations against the petitioner are false, and there is nothing to connect the petitioner to the present case. The petitioner was arrested on 14.09.2025. The investigation is complete, and the police have filed the charge sheet on 12.11.2025. The matter is listed for consideration of the charge on 21.04.2026. The prosecution has cited 20 witnesses, and their examination would take a considerable time. The petitioner is the sole earner of the family, and his family would suffer in his absence. The petitioner would abide by the terms and conditions that the Court may impose. Hence, it was prayed that the present petition be allowed and the petitioner be released on bail.

3. The petition is opposed by filing a status report asserting that the police had set up a nakka at Balloh Toll Plaza on 14.09.2025at about 6:30 PM and were checking the vehicles. A vehicle bearing registration No. T0725HR2992 BD came to the spot at about 7:15 am. The police signalled the driver to stop, but he tried to speed away. The police stopped the vehicle and demanded the documents from the driver. However, he could not produce any document. He also could not give any reason for trying to speed away. The police associated Pramod Kumar as an independent person and enquired about the names and addresses of the occupants of the vehicle. The driver identified himself as Sandeep, and the person sitting in the front seat identified himself as Praveen (the present petitioner). The police checked the vehicle and recovered a carry bag kept beneath the front passenger’s seat. The police checked the carry bag and recovered 1kg and 30 grams of charas. The police seized the charas and arrested the occupants of the vehicle. The charas was sent to the SFSL, and as per the analysis, it was confirmed to be an abstract of cannabis and a sample of charas. The police filed the charge sheet before the Court on 12.11.2025. The matter is listed before the learned Trial Court on 21.04.2026. Hence, the status report.

4. I have heard Mr Yug Singhal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr Ajit Sharma, learned Deputy Advocate General for the respondent/State.

5. Mr Yug Singhal, learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he was falsely implicated. There is no material to connect the petitioner to the commission of the crime, and his further detention is not justified. Hence, he prayed that the present petition be allowed and the petitioner be released on bail.

6. Mr Ajit Sharma, learned Deputy Advocate General for the respondent/State, submitted that the petitioner was found in possession of a commercial quantity of charas and the rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act apply to the present case. The petitioner has not satisfied the twin conditions laid down under of the NDPS Act, and he is not entitled to bail.