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) 1157

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
VIRENDER SINGH, J.
Bittu Ram - Applicant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh - Respondent
Cr.MP(M) No.: 2236 of 2025
Decided On : 26-09-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Applicant :Mr. Yashveer Singh Rathore, Advocate.
For the Respondent:Mr. Varun Chandel, Mr. Mohinder Zharaick, Additional Advocates General, with Mr. Rohit Sharma & Ms. Ranjna Patial, Deputy Advocates General.

In NDPS commercial quantity cases, bail granted where accused involvement relies solely on co-accused's custodial disclosure statement, inadmissible under evidence law, satisfying Section 37 twin conditions of non-guilt and no likelihood of reoffending.

Headnote:(A) NDPS Act - Sections 20, 29 & 37 - Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita - Section 483 - Bail in case involving commercial quantity contraband - Rigors of Section 37 applicable requiring satisfaction of twin conditions beyond prima facie: reasonable grounds to believe accused not guilty of offence and not likely to commit any offence while on bail - Expression “reasonable grounds” contemplates substantial probable causes - Involvement solely based on co-accused disclosure statement made in police custody held inadmissible for conviction hence twin conditions satisfied - Bail granted subject to conditions. (Paras 20-31)

(B) Evidence - Confessional statements to police officers barred and cannot form basis to deny bail where role attributed only through such revelation - No financial transactions or other corroborative evidence against applicant. (Paras 27-30)

Facts of the case:
Police party on patrolling duty nabbed two outsiders carrying plastic sacks containing charas weighing 2 kilograms 220 grams concealed in maize flour. Co-accused disclosed during investigation that contraband kept in bus and photographs sent via messaging app along with video call by applicant who was subsequently arrested. Mobile phones sent for forensic analysis. No prior criminal record. Investigation complete, trial pending for charge framing.

Findings of Court:
Applicant directed to be released on bail on furnishing personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties subject to conditions including regular court attendance, no tampering, monthly affidavits of no new crimes.

Issues: Whether twin conditions under Section 37 NDPS Act satisfied given involvement based on co-accused custodial disclosure and whether custodial interrogation still required.

Ratio Decidendi: Court must record findings beyond prima facie on twin conditions for commercial quantity cases; custodial disclosure inadmissible per law hence no reasonable grounds to believe guilt at bail stage; conditions imposed ensure no reoffending. Result : Bail application allowed.

Table of Content
1. applicant's contentions denying role seeking bail (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9)
2. prosecution alleges charas recovery applicant's facilitation (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19)
3. ndps section 37 mandates stringent twin conditions (Para 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25)
4. disclosure inadmissible twin conditions satisfied (Para 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31)
5. bail granted subject strict conditions (Para 32 , 33 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39)
JUDGMENT :

Virender Singh, Judge

Applicant–Bittu Ram, has filed the present application, 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, arising out of FIR No.28/2025, dated 30th January, 2025, registered with Police Station, Nurpur, District Kangra, H.P., under Sections 20 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘NDPS Act’).

2. According to the applicant, the case of the police is highly improbable and is highly suspicious, having no truth in it. According to the applicant, the grounds of detention were not communicated to him.

3. It is the further case of the applicant that he has no role in the commission of the alleged crime, as, he neither was instrumental behind the arrangement and transportation of contraband, nor had ever any communication pertaining to sale and purchase.

4. According to the applicant, the case is now listed for consideration on charge and there is no possibility of conclusion of trial in near future.

5. All these facts have been highlighted to show that the custodial interrogation of the applicant is no longer required by the Police, in this case.

6. It is the further case of the applicant that he is a poor person and sole bread earner for his family.

7. The applicant has also tried his luck by moving similar application before the Court of learned Special Judge-III, Kangra at Dharamshala, District Kangra, which was dismissed on 28.03.2025.

8. Apart from this, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, has given certain undertakings, on behalf of the applicant, for which, the applicant is ready to abide by, in case, ordered to be released, on bail, during the pendency of the trial.

9. On the basis of the above facts, a prayer has been made to allow the application.

10. When put to notice, police has filed the status report, disclosing therein, that on 30.01.2025, ASI Satender Singh, CIA, Police District Nurpur, along with other police officials, was on patrolling duty and duty to detect the crime relating to excise and narcotics, towards Rehan, Raja-ka-Talab, Ganoh, etc..

10.1. At about 04.10 p.m., when, the police party was present in front of Himachal Bakery near Matholi Police Line, and was talking with two local persons, namely Gopal Singh and Deep Singh, at that time, he noticed two persons coming from Jasoor side and were moving towards Talwara side on foot. One was having blue coloured plastic sack. He was moving in fast speed and other person, who had worn black neck was also having a plastic sack. One person had covered his mouth with red colour scarf.

10.2. The I.O. inquired from Gopal Singh and Deep Singh, about those persons, upon which, both of them said that they do not know them. Both persons were found to be outsiders. The I.O., called the person, who was having the blue coloured sack, in his hand, however, he has not given any heed to the command of the I.O. As such, both the said persons were nabbed and I.O. apprised them about the identification.

10.3. On seeing the identity card, both of them became perplexed, as such, the I.O. developed a suspicion in his mind that both the said persons were having stolen or suspicious articles. As such, their antecedents were ascertained. They disclosed their names as Jagdish and Tega, residents of Chamba.

10.4. Thereafter, the sack, which they were carrying were checked. On checking, the same were








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