Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
RAKESH KAINTHLA, J.
Vidya Nath - Petitioner
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh - Respondent
Cr. MP (M) No. 1960 of 2025
Decided On : 24-11-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. commercial charas recovered from taxi passenger's bag. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. parties contend on bail eligibility under ndps. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. supreme court bail principles: jail exception for gravity. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 4. known vehicle occupants in conscious possession. (Para 11 , 12) |
| 5. section 37 twin conditions mandatory and unsatisfied. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19) |
| 6. hostile witness no ground for ndps bail. (Para 20 , 21 , 22) |
| 7. incarceration delay yields to section 37. (Para 23 , 24 , 25) |
| 8. bail petition dismissed. (Para 26 , 27 , 28) |
Rakesh Kainthla, J.
The petitioner has filed the present petition for seeking regular bail in FIR No. 172 of 2024, dated 20.10.2024, registered at Police Station, Ghumarwin, District Bilaspur, H.P., for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 20 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (NDPS).
2. It has been asserted that, as per the prosecution, the petitioner was travelling in a taxi bearing registration No. HP- 01K-4679 with co-accused Duni Chand. Amar Nath was driving the taxi. The police intercepted it and recovered 1.5111 kgs of charas. The police arrested the petitioner. The prosecution has failed to complete the evidence, and the petitioner’s right to a speedy trial is being violated. The bar under Section 37 of the NDPS Act does not automatically apply because of the recovery of the commercial quantity. The recovery was not effected from the conscious possession. The co-accused Amar Nath has been granted bail by this Court on 16.07.2025. The prosecution has relied upon the statement of Puneet Kaundal, who was projected as an independent witness, but he turned hostile. The testimony of this witness made the prosecution’s case doubtful. Therefore, 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 police party was on Nakabandi duty on 20.10.2024. A taxi bearing registration No. HP-01K-4679 came from Mandi at 8.10 PM. The police signalled the driver to stop the vehicle. The driver stopped the vehicle. The police started checking the documents. The person sitting beside the driver tried to conceal a bag. The police asked him the reason for doing so, but he could not give a satisfactory answer. The driver identified himself as Amarnath, the person sitting beside the driver identified himself as Vidya Nath, and the person sitting in the rear seat identified himself as Duni Chand. The police checked the bag kept by Vidya Nath and found 1.511 kgs of charas in it. The police seized the charas and arrested the occupants. The charas was sent to FSL and was confirmed to be the extract of cannabis and a sample of charas. The police checked the call detail record and the bank statements, but could not find the involvement of any other person. All the people were known to each other. Vidya Nath and Amar Nath are remotely related to each other. The police filed the charge sheet before the learned Special Judge on 5.5.2025. The matter was listed before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ghumarwin, Bilaspur, on 26.9.2025, for recording the statements of prosecution witnesses. Hence, the status report.
4. I have heard Mr Mukesh Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr Jitender Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General, for the respondent-State.
5. Mr Mukesh Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he was falsely implicated. Mere presence of the petitioner in the vehicle is not sufficient to connect him to the commission of the crime. The independent witness turned hostile, and there is no material against the petitioner. There is an inordinate delay in the progress of the trial. Therefore, he prayed that the present petition be allowed and the petitioner be released on bail.
6. Mr Jitender Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General for the respondent/State, submitte
In NDPS commercial quantity cases, vehicle occupants known to each other prima facie deemed in conscious possession; bail requires satisfaction of Section 37 twin conditions despite hostile witness o....
Bail in NDPS commercial quantity cases denied absent court satisfaction of twin Section 37 conditions, even with prolonged incarceration or trial delay; vehicle occupants prima facie in conscious pos....
For bail in NDPS Act cases involving commercial quantity, the accused must establish reasonable grounds of innocence and lack of likelihood to commit further offenses, per Section 37.
In NDPS cases involving commercial quantity, strict satisfaction of Section 37 twin conditions mandatory for bail; trial delay or incarceration alone insufficient grounds.
Bail denied in NDPS commercial quantity case as vehicle occupants prima facie in conscious possession of contraband; twin conditions under Section 37 not satisfied despite trial delay.
The standard for bail under the NDPS Act requires proof of innocence and no likelihood of reoffending; mere claims of trial delays are insufficient for release.
The court ruled that bail cannot be granted under Section 37 of the NDPS Act unless conditions of proving innocence and minimal risk of reoffending are met, regardless of trial delays.
Bail denied in NDPS commercial quantity case as accused failed twin conditions of Section 37: no reasonable grounds to believe not guilty given prima facie conscious possession via concealment attemp....
Bail denied in commercial quantity NDPS case as petitioner failed Section 37 twin conditions despite prolonged custody and trial delay; vehicle occupants prima facie in conscious possession.
In NDPS commercial quantity cases, bail requires strict satisfaction of Section 37 twin conditions: reasonable grounds believing not guilty and no reoffending risk. Prolonged detention, trial delays ....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
