Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(HP) 482

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
VIRENDER SINGH, J.
Shahi Mahatma - Applicant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh - Respondent
Cr.MP (M) Nos. 1932, 2190, 2651 and 2775 of 2025
Decided on : 08-01-2026

Advocates Appeared:
For the Applicants :Mr. Ashok Sharma, Senior Advocate with Mr. Vinod Chauhan, Advocate, Mr. Aditya Kaushal, Mr. Abhimanyu Thakur & Mr. S.D. Gill, Advocates.
For the Respondent:Mr. Tejasvi Sharma, Additional Advocate General, with Mr. Rohit Sharma and Ms. Ranjna Patial, Deputy Advocates General.

Bail in NDPS commercial quantity cases mandates court satisfaction of twin conditions under Section 37: reasonable grounds of non-guilt based on substantial evidence and no likelihood of reoffending; parity invalid if prior grants ignore these rigors.

Headnote:(A) NDPS Act, 1985 - Sections 21, 29, 37 - BNSS, 2023 - Section 483 - Bail applications during trial pendency - Commercial quantity contraband recovered from main accused - Applicants implicated via disclosures, confessional statements and financial transactions totaling significant amounts indicating purchase for sale - Discharged from conspiracy and financing charges - Rigors of Section 37 applicable requiring satisfaction of twin conditions: reasonable grounds for believing not guilty and not likely to reoffend - Conditions mandatory and more than prima facie - Parity rejected as co-accused bail orders failed to apply Section 37 - Bail dismissed. (Paras 14-24)

(B) NDPS Act - Section 37 - Bail restrictions in addition to general provisions - Public Prosecutor heard - Court must record positive findings based on substantial probable causes - Negation of bail rule, grant exception in commercial quantity cases. (Paras 15-19)

Facts of the case:
Four applications filed seeking bail in case involving recovery of 468.380 grams commercial quantity contraband from main accused during interception based on secret information - Compliance with procedural safeguards noted - Disclosures linked applicants to interstate drug distribution network involving procurement, storage, supply to peddlers and financial layering via bank accounts - Applicants arrested later; investigation complete with charge-sheet filed - Prior bail applications dismissed.

Findings of Court:
No reasonable grounds to believe applicants not guilty given financial transactions and disclosures evidencing role in peddling - Risk of tampering evidence or aiding absconsion - Prior co-accused bails flawed for non-compliance with Section 37.

Issues: Whether twin conditions under Section 37 satisfied for bail grant despite commercial quantity involvement; validity of parity claim with co-accused; assessment of implicatory material comprising disclosures and transactions.

Ratio Decidendi: Section 37 NDPS imposes stringent mandatory conditions for bail in commercial quantity offences necessitating court satisfaction on non-guilt via substantial probable causes and non-recidivism likelihood - Appellate scrutiny reveals lower court parity bails defective for ignoring these rigors - Financial linkages and disclosures establish prima facie complicity beyond personal use. Result : Bail applications dismissed.

Table of Content
1. applicants claim innocence, no possession, parity for bail (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10)
2. compliant procedure recovers commercial quantity heroin (Para 11)
3. interstate racket with applicants involved, tampering risk (Para 12)
4. sections 21, 29 attract section 37 rigors (Para 13 , 14)
5. commercial quantity mandates strict section 37 compliance (Para 16)
6. reasonable grounds beyond prima facie for ndps bail (Para 18 , 19)
7. parity invalid without section 37 findings (Para 20 , 21 , 22 , 23)
8. bail denied for section 37 non-compliance (Para 24 , 25)

JUDGMENT :

VIRENDER SINGH, J.

The above titled four applications are being decided by the common order, as, the applicants have filed these applications, under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as the 'BNSS'), with a prayer to release them on bail, during the pendency of trial, in case FIR No.50 of 2024, dated 19.09.2024, registered, under Sections 21 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘NDPS Act’), with Police Station Kotkhai, District Shimla, H.P.

2. According to the applicants, they are innocent and have falsely been implicated, in the above noted case.

3. As per the applicants, the contraband has not been recovered from their possession and the learned trial Court, at the time of consideration of charge, has discharged the applicants from the offence punishable under Section 27A of the NDPS Act and Section 111 of the BNS.

4. It is the further case of the applicants that it is well settled that where the foundational charges of conspiracy and financing, under Section 27A of the NDPS Act, do not survive, the rigors of Section 37 NDPS Act, must be assessed, in the light of the actual remaining allegations.

5. According to the applicants, they have been implicated, in the present case, on the basis of the disclosure statement, confessional statement or on the basis of the financial transactions. According to them, they are not having any criminal history.
6. The applicants had also earlier tried their luck by moving similar applications, before the learned trial Court, as well as, before this Court, however, their applications have been dismissed.

7. The applicants have given certain undertakings, for which, they are ready to abide by, in case, they are ordered to be released on bail, during the pendency of trial.

8. On the basis of the above facts, learned counsel appearing for the applicants, have prayed that the applicants are also entitled to the relief of bail, as, their co accused, have already been released on bail, by the Court of learned Special JudgeI, Shimla.

9. In addition to this, learned Senior counsel has also relied upon the decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) Nos.16642 of 2023, titled as Shince Babu versus The State of Kerala & Another and Criminal Appeal No.4690 of 2025, titled as Mangal Yadav versus State of Utter Pradesh , and has prayed that the application may kindly be allowed.

10. Applicant Hitesh Thakur, was earlier released on bail, by the Court of learned Special JudgeI, Shimla, vide order dated 01.01.2025, however, he could not put appearance before the learned trial Court, as such, his personal and surety bonds were ordered to be cancelled and he was remanded to the judicial custody. Thereafter, he has again moved an application before the Court of learned Special JudgeI, Shimla, however, his application has been dismissed, vide order dated 13.11.2025. Now, he is before this Court, seeking the relief of bail.

11. When put to notice, the police has filed the status report, disclosing therein, that on 18.09.2024, SI Mehar Chand, I.O. ANTF(FU) CID, along with other police official, left the office in official vehicle, bearing registration No.HP03C5663, for patrolling duty and duty to detect the crime relating to narcotics, towards Dhalli, Theog, Kotkhai, Jubbal, and Kharapathar.

11.1.