Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(HP) 290

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
RAKESH KAINTHLA, J.
Vivek Sharma - Ptitioner
Versus
NCB - Rspondent
Cr. MP(M) No. 2839 of 2025
Decided On : 16-03-2026

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr Sanjeev Bhushan, enior Advocate with Mr Bodh Raj, Advocate.
For the Respondent:Mr Ashwani Pathak, Senior Advocate, with Mr Dev Raj, Advocate.

Bail rejected in NDPS commercial quantity case as petitioner failed Section 37 twin conditions; conscious possession from vehicle recovery established prima facie; medical disability and trial progress insufficient without statutory satisfaction.

Headnote:(A) NDPS Act, 1985 - Sections 8, 20, 25, 29 & 37 - Bail in cases involving commercial quantity - Recovery of 1.950 kg charas from vehicle carrying petitioner and co-accused - Conscious possession of occupants upheld - Petitioner fails twin conditions under Section 37 i.e., reasonable grounds to believe not guilty of offence and not likely to commit offence while on bail - Medical disability (80% paraplegia), interim bail history, charge-sheet filing, and ongoing trial (2 witnesses examined) insufficient absent Section 37 satisfaction - Normal rule of bail not jail overridden by NDPS rigours where commercial quantity involved - Negation of bail is rule, grant exception - Petition dismissed; liberty to seek interim bail for medical emergency from trial court. (Paras 11-20, 25-27)

(B) Bail - Principles - Considerations include nature/evidence of accusation, punishment severity, tampering risk, antecedents, repetition likelihood, justice obstruction - Section 37 imposes additional mandatory limitations for commercial quantity offences. (Paras 5-10)

Facts of the case:
Petition for regular bail in case of NDPS offences. Prosecution: secret information on charas transport in specific vehicle led to interception; recovery from occupants; voluntary statements admitting procurement/transport; arrests followed. Petitioner: innocent, no personal recovery, disabled, charge-sheet filed, would comply conditions. Bail previously granted interim, later cancelled.

Findings of Court:
Petitioner prima facie connected via vehicle occupancy and statements; commercial quantity attracts Section 37 rigours; no satisfaction of twin conditions; medical/trial delay arguments rejected.

Issues: Whether petitioner satisfies Section 37 twin conditions for bail despite commercial quantity recovery, disability, and trial progress?

Ratio Decidendi: Courts must strictly apply Section 37 in commercial quantity NDPS cases; prima facie material showing involvement precludes bail absent proof of innocence and non-recidivism likelihood; disability or delay not substitutes for statutory mandate.

Result: Petition dismissed.

Table of Content
1. commercial charas recovered from vehicle occupants. (Para 2 , 3)
2. petitioner claims innocence; respondent s37 rigours. (Para 4 , 5 , 6)
3. bail parameters from supreme court precedents. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10)
4. occupants have conscious possession per madan lal. (Para 11 , 12)
5. commercial quantity invokes ndps s37 twin conditions. (Para 13 , 14)
6. s37 requires reasonable non-guilt belief. (Para 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19)
7. petitioner fails s37 twin conditions. (Para 20)
8. delay, health yield to s37 mandate. (Para 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25)
9. petitioner's precedents inapplicable here. (Para 26 , 27)
10. bail petition dismissed; medical option open. (Para 29 , 30 , 31)

JUDGMENT :

RAKESH KAINTHLA, J.

The petitioner has filed the present petition for seeking regular bail in Crime No. 52 of 2022, dated 21.7.2022, registered with the Narcotics Control Bureau, Sub Zone, Mandi, H.P., for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 8, 20, 25 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (NDPS).

2. It has been asserted that, as per the prosecution, the Intelligence Officer, Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB), received a secret information that Vivek Sharma was going from Tissa along with one Rakesh Kumar and one lady in a vehicle bearing registration No. PB-07Y-2385. They had concealed a huge quantity of charas in the vehicle. The information was presented to Sandeep Kumar Yadav, who formed a team. Local police officials were associated and the vehicle was intercepted. The driver identified himself as Rakesh Kumar. The person sitting in the front seat identified himself as Vivek Sharma (the present petitioner), and the woman sitting in the rear seat identified herself as Praveen Kumari. The vehicle was searched after completing the formalities, and 1.950 kilograms of charas was recovered. The samples were taken. The occupants were arrested. Learned Special Judge-I, Kangra, granted interim bail for three months for the petitioner’s treatment on 3.11.2022. The interim bail was extended from time to time. NCB filed a petition for cancellation of the bail, which was allowed on 20.6.2025 and the bail granted to the petitioner was cancelled. The petitioner is innocent, and no recovery was effected from him. The petitioner belongs to a respectable family. He had an attack of paraplegia and is 80% disabled. His whole body is not functioning. Investigation was completed, and a charge sheet has been filed before the Court. 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 NCB received a secret information regarding the transportation of a huge quantity of charas in a car bearing registration No. PB-07Y-2385 on 21.7.2022. The information was passed to Assistant Director, NCB, Amritsar. A team was constituted, and the vehicle was intercepted. Recovery of 1.950 kilograms of charas was made from the possession of Vivek Sharma, Rakesh Kumar and Parveen Kumari. Voluntary statements of accused persons were recorded, and they were arrested. Petitioner Vivek Sharma made a statement under Section 67 that he had bought 2.00 kilograms of charas from Taj Mohammad. Rakesh Kumar also made a voluntary statement under of the NDPS Act and admitted his guilt. The petitioner was in touch with Rakesh Sharma. The charge sheet was filed before the Court. NCB has cited 11 witnesses, out of whom two have been examined. The witnesses were summoned on 13.1.2026, 14.1.2026, and 15.1.2026. The petitioner would flee from justice if released on bail. Hence, it was prayed that the present petition be dismissed.

4. I have heard Mr Sanjeev Bhushan, learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Mr Bodh Raj, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr Ashwani Pathak, learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Mr Dev Raj, learned counsel for the respondent-NCB.

5. Mr Sanjeev Bhu