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

2025 Supreme(HP) 1148

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
VIRENDER SINGH, J.
Rajinder Singh - Applicant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh - Respondent
Cr. MP (M) Nos.: 2304 & 2305 of 2025
Decided On : 26-09-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Applicant :Mr. Sahil Thakur, Ms. Supriya Chaudhary, Advocates.
For the Respondent:Mr. Mohinder Zharaick, Additional Advocate General with Ms. Ranjna Patial, Deputy Advocate General, assisted by HC Devender Prakash, No. 96

NDPS Section 37 mandates twin conditions for bail in commercial quantity cases: reasonable grounds believing not guilty and unlikely to reoffend. Spot recovery memos signed by accused satisfy grounds of arrest in chance recoveries.

Headnote:(A) NDPS Act - Sections 15, 29 and 37 - BNSS - Section 483 - Bail application during trial pendency in NDPS case with commercial quantity contraband - Section 37 imposes twin mandatory conditions in addition to general bail provisions: opportunity to Public Prosecutor and court satisfaction of reasonable grounds believing accused not guilty of offence and unlikely to commit offence while on bail - Expression “reasonable grounds” means substantial probable causes beyond prima facie - Conditions cumulative; not satisfied here as nothing on record supports them - Applications dismissed. (Paras 13-17, 24)

(B) Constitution - Article 22(1) - Arrest procedures - Grounds of arrest - Signing of on-spot recovery, inventory memos and documents by accused in chance recovery constitutes substantial compliance with intimation requirement - Not applicable where recovery not based on prior information and offence patent at arrest site. (Paras 18-23)

Facts of the case:
Police on patrol and traffic check stop truck after driver appears perplexed; associate independent witnesses; search under tarpaulin reveals sacks containing 54.910 kg poppy husk (commercial quantity) and poppy seeds; formalities completed, applicants arrested, charge-sheet filed, trial fixed for evidence.

Findings of Court:
Bail applications under Section 483 BNSS dismissed.

Issues: Whether twin conditions under Section 37 NDPS satisfied for bail grant in commercial quantity case; whether grounds of arrest supplied to applicants.

Ratio Decidendi: Strict compliance with Section 37 NDPS mandatory for commercial quantity offences - negation of bail rule, grant exception; signing spot documents by accused fulfills arrest grounds intimation in chance recovery scenarios.

Result: Bail applications dismissed.

Table of Content
1. applicants claim false implication, seek bail post-investigation (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8)
2. chance recovery of commercial quantity poppy husk from truck (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12)
3. ndps section 37 mandates twin conditions for commercial bail (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17)
4. on-site documents satisfy grounds of arrest requirement (Para 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23)
5. bail denied for failing section 37 twin conditions (Para 24 , 25)
JUDGMENT :

Virender Singh, Judge

The above titled bail applications are disposed of by a common order, as, both the applicants have filed these applications, under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (hereinafter referred to as the 'BNSS'), seeking the relief of bail, during the pendency of the trial, in a case, arising out of FIR No. 63/2024, dated 22.08.2024, registered with Police Station Tahliwal, District Una, H.P., under Sections 15 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘NDPS Act’).

2. According to the applicants, they are innocent persons and have falsely been implicated and arrested by the police, in the present case.

3. As per the applicants, they have been roped, in the present case, by some influential persons deliberately, in connivance with the local police.

4. It is the further case of the applicants that the investigation, in the present case, is complete and charge- sheet has been filed in the competent Court of law and the case is now fixed for PWs for 18th November, 2025.

5. According to the applicants, they are entitled to the bail, as, their custodial interrogation is no longer required. According to them, the grounds of arrest have not been supplied to them.

6. Applicants have earlier tried their luck, by moving similar applications, before this Court, however, the said applications were dismissed as withdrawn on 01.05.2025.

7. Apart from this, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicants, have given certain undertakings, on behalf of the applicants, for which, the applicants are ready to abide by, in case, ordered to be released, on bail, during the pendency of the trial.

8. On the basis of the above facts, a prayer has been made to allow the applications.

9. When put to notice, the police has filed the status report, disclosing therein, that on 22.08.2024, HC Devender Prakash, No.96, I.O. Police Station, Tahliwal, along with other police officials, was on patrolling duty, traffic checking, picketing duty and duty to detect the crime relating to excise and narcotics.

9.1. At about 2.55 p.m., when, the police party had put a picketing, for traffic checking at Tahliwal, near ‘Bhajne the Dhaba’, they noticed a car, being driven by its driver, coming from Santoshgarh side. The I.O. had given the signal to the driver to stop the car. Consequently, he has stopped the car bearing registration No.HP80A-9899, on the side of the road.

9.2. On inquiry, the driver has disclosed his name as Sahil Thakur. When, the I.O. was talking to the driver of the said car, meanwhile, he noticed a truck, being driven by its driver, coming from Santoshgarh side. The I.O. directed the driver to stop the same. Consequently, the truck driver stopped the truck, in front of ‘Bhajne the Dhaba’. Registration number of the said truck was HP19B- 7437.

9.3. The truck driver, on seeing the police party, became perplexed and apart from the driver, another person was also found, in the truck. Since the truck driver became perplexed. As such, the I.O. developed suspicion that some illegal article could be there in the truck.

9.4. Thereafter, Sahil Thakur (car driver) and HC Hardeep Singh No.108, were associated, as witnesses and the names of truck driver and his companion, were inquired. The person, on wheel disclosed his name, as Varender Singh (applicant in Cr.MP(M) No.2305 of 2025) and the person, accompanying him, had disclosed his name as Rajinder Singh (applicant in Cr.MP(M) No.2304 of 2025). Both the persons were found







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