IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA .

Cr.MP(M) No. 2845 of 2023 Reserved on: 21.11.2023.

Date of Decision: 11.12.2023. Sandeep Thakur alias Sandy ...Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradeshr ...Respondent Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rakesh Kainthla, Judge.

Whether approved for reporting?¹ No.

For the P etitioner : Mr. Harsh Vardhan, Advocate.

For the Respondent : Mr Prashant Sen, Deputy Advocate General with PSI Ravinder Singh, IO, Police Station Dhali, District Shimla, H.P.

Rakesh Kainthla, Judge The petitioner has filed the present petition seeking the grant of regular bail. It has been asserted that FIR No. 205 of 2023, dated 22.10.2023 was registered against the petitioner for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 21 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (in short

1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes.

‘ND&PS Act’) at Police Station, Dhalli, District Shimla, H.P. As per the police version, the police party searched the vehicle bearing registration no. HP-62-B-0645. The petitioner was occupying the driver's seat. The police searched the vehicle based on suspicion in the presence of independent witnesses and recovered 8.54 grams of heroin. The petitioner is innocent and he was falsely implicated. The investigation has been completed and the peutitioner is not required by the police. The petitioner has boeen in custody since 22.10.2023. The petitioner would abiCde by all the terms and conditions, which may be imposed by the Court. Hence the present petition.

2. The petition was opposed by filing a reply, asserting that the police party was on patrolling duty. They found a vehicle bearing registration no. HP-62-B-0645 parked on the roadside. The petitioner was occupying the driver's seat. The police inquired his name but the petitioner tried to run away. The police apprehended the petitioner and searched the vehicle in the presence of independent witnesses. The police recovered the electronic weighing machine and 8.54 grams of heroin. The police seized the heroin and arrested the petitioner. The petitioner revealed on inquiry that he had purchased the heroin from Honey for Jeet Ram, who revealed that he had purchased the heroin for his consumption. The petitioner identified Honey who was arrested. The petitioner, Jeet Ram and Honey Kumar are in judicial custody. The challan is being prepared against the petitioner and other accused.

3. I have heard Mr. Harsh Vardhan, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Prashant Sen, learned Deputy Advocate General for the respondent-State.

4. Mr. Harsh Vardhan, learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he was falsely implicated. As per the police version, the petitioner had bought the heroin at the instance of Jeet Ram. The petitioner is not a drug peddler. The petitioner has no criminal antecedents; therefore, he prayed that the present petition be allowed and the petitioner be released on bail.

5. Mr. Prashant Sen, learned Deputy Advocate General for the respondent-State submitted that the petitioner is involved in the transportation of heroin, which is a heinous offence as it is adversely affecting the young generation;

therefore, he prayed that the present petition be dismissed.

6. I have given considerable thought to the rival submissions at the bar and have gone through the record carefully.

7. The parameters for granting bail were considered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Bhagwan Singh v. Dilip Kumar @ Deepu @ Depak, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1059, wherein it was observed as under:-

12. The grant of bail is a discretionary relief which necesosarily means that such discretion would have to be exercised in a judicious manner and not as a matter of Ccourse. The grant of bail is dependent upon contextual facts of the matter being dealt with by the Court and may vary from case to case. There cannot be any exhaustive hparameters set out for considering the application for a grant of