Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(HP) 1482

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Rakesh Kainthla, J.
Rakesh Kumar -Petitioner
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh - Respondent
Cr. MP(M) No. 2328 of 2025
Decided On : 13-11-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr N.S. Chandel, Sr. Advocate, with Mr V.K. Gupta, Advocate.
For the Respondent:Mr Jitender K. Sharma, Additional Advocate General.

Co-accused disclosure statements inadmissible under Evidence Act for NDPS bail denial; call records and CCTV vehicle association insufficient for prima facie case or Section 37 rigour post charge-sheet, warranting release.

Headnote:(A) Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act - Sections 20, 25 and 29 - Bail application - Commercial quantity of contraband recovered from intercepted vehicle whose driver fled - Petitioner implicated solely as driver on basis of co-accused disclosure statement, supplemented by call detail records showing multiple communications around incident time, similar locations, and CCTV footage depicting vehicles moving together suggesting conspiracy - Disclosure statement of co-accused inadmissible under Section 25 of Evidence Act and barred by Section 162 CrPC - Call records unreliable for precise location tracking; CCTV and communications insufficient to establish prima facie involvement or conscious possession attracting rigours of Section 37 NDPS - Investigation complete with charge-sheet filed - No fruitful purpose in continued custody - Bail granted subject to conditions. (Paras 10, 11, 12, 15, 16, 18, 19)

(B) Bail - Grant of - Principles - Courts to consider nature of accusation, evidence quality, punishment severity, risk of absconding or tampering, public interest - Not to mechanically grant or deny; prima facie satisfaction required without mini-trial - Post charge-sheet, detention not justified absent strong material. (Paras 8, 9)

Facts of the case:
Police on patrol intercepted suspicious vehicle; driver fled into jungle. Registered owner stated sold vehicle to co-accused who confirmed engaging petitioner as driver. Co-accused located in another vehicle with associates, some of whom also fled during search. Contraband weighing 2.570 kgs recovered from vehicle in presence of witnesses. Petitioner arrested based on co-accused statement, call records, and footage; charge-sheet filed.

Findings of Court:
Petitioner released on bail bond of Rs.1,00,000/- with one surety of like amount subject to conditions including no witness intimidation, trial attendance, address reporting, passport surrender, and mobile/social media details furnishing.

Issues: Whether co-accused disclosure statement, call detail records, location data, and CCTV footage constitute sufficient material for prima facie case under NDPS attracting Section 37 bar; propriety of continued custody post-investigation.

Ratio Decidendi: Confessional statements by co-accused during investigation inadmissible as substantive evidence against petitioner; can lend assurance only to other proof which is absent here. Ancillary evidence like call records (not designed for precise location) and vehicle association via CCTV fails to connect petitioner to crime prima facie, especially post charge-sheet when no purpose served by custody. Result : Bail petition allowed.

Table of Content
1. vehicle interception and charas recovery; petitioner linked by co-accused (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. parties contend on evidence sufficiency for bail (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7)
3. supreme court bail parameters: offence nature, evidence, risks (Para 8 , 9)
4. co-accused confessions inadmissible under evidence act, crpc (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14)
5. cdr, locations unreliable for proving involvement (Para 15)
6. no prima facie case; s.37 ndps inapplicable; roots reduce risk (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20)
7. bail granted with conditions; observations limited (Para 21 , 22 , 23)

JUDGMENT :

Rakesh Kainthla, J.

The petitioner has filed the present petition for seeking regular bail in FIR No. 06/2025, dated 25.01.2025, registered at Police Station Dalhousie, District Chamba, H.P., for the commission of offences punishable under Section 20, 25 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS). Act.

2. It has been asserted that the police intercepted a vehicle bearing registration No. HP-44-5331 on 24.01.2025 at about 12:15 pm. The driver fled away from the spot and could not be apprehended. Shobi Ram was found to be the registered owner of the vehicle. The police contacted him, and he disclosed that he had sold the vehicle to Harinder Kumar. The police searched for Harinder Kumar and found him in another vehicle bearing registration No. HP01C-1969. The driver of the vehicle disclosed his name as Dharu. The person sitting beside the driver disclosed his name as Liyakat Ali, and the person sitting in the rear seat disclosed his name as Harinder. Harinder confirmed that he had purchased the vehicle bearing registration No. HP44-5331 from Shobi. He also disclosed that he had engaged the petitioner as a driver. The police checked the vehicle bearing registration No. HP 44-5331 in the presence of witnesses and recovered 2.570 kgs of charas from it. The petitioner is innocent and was falsely implicated on the statement of Harinder Kumar. There is no other evidence to connect him to the commission of the crime. The petitioner is the sole earner of the family. The investigation is complete, and no fruitful purpose would be served by detaining the petitioner in custody. Hence the petition.

3. The petition is opposed by filing a status report asserting that the police were on a patrolling duty on 24.1.2025. They intercepted a vehicle bearing registration No. HP-44-5331. The driver stopped the vehicle after seeing the police and ran towards the jungle. The police followed him but could not apprehend him. Shobi Ram was found to be the registered owner, who was contacted telephonically. He disclosed that he had sold the vehicle to Harinder Kumar. The location of Harinder Kumar was found between Lahad and Kunah. The police searched for him and found a vehicle bearing registration No HP-01C-1969 parked on the roadside. The driver identified himself as Dharu Ram. The person sitting beside the driver identified himself as Liyakat Ali, and the person sitting in the rear seat identified himself as Harinder Kumar. The police brought them to the spot where the vehicle bearing registration No. HP-44-5331 was parked. The vehicle was searched in the presence of Abdul Mazeed and Basheer Mohammad. The police were searching the vehicle when Dharu Ram and Liyakat Ali ran away from the spot. The police ran after them but could not catch them. The search was continued, and the police recovered 2.570 kgs of charas. The police seized the charas, investigated the matter and obtained the call detail record. The record of CCTV Footage was also checked. The vehicles bearing registration No. HP-01C-1969 and HP-44-5331 were found moving together in the CCTV footage. Rakesh Kumar had talked to Harinder Kumar and Liyakat Ali many times between 7.43 AM and 12.48 PM. Police arrested Rakesh Kumar, Harinder Kumar and Dharo Ram. Liyakat Ali has absconded, and efforts are being made to trace him. The charge sheet was filed after the completion of the investigation. The m