IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr.MP(M) No.2562 of 2023 Decided on: 10th November, 20.23 -------------------------------------------------------------------------P------------

Ravi Sharma .....Petitioner Versus H State of Himachal Pradesh .....Respondent ------------------------------------------------------f-------------------------------

Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 ----------------------------------r---------------------------------------------------

For the Petitioner: Mr. Ajay Kochhar, Senior Advocate with Mr. Varun Chauhan and Mr. Arpit Shukla, Advocates.

For the Respondent: Mr. Pranay Pratap Singh, Additional CAdvocate General with Mr. Sidharth Jalta, Deputy Advocate General.

ASI Ranjeet Singh, Police Station h Dharampur, District Solan, H.P., present in person alongwith record.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge The petitioner seeks regular bail in FIR No.22/2023, dated 26.03.2023, registered under Sections 21 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (in short ‘NDPS Act’) and Section 181 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 at Police Station Dharampur, District Solan, H.P.

1 Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes.

2. The respondent has filed the status report and also produced the record.

3. Facts:- P

3(i). As per the status report, on 26.03.2023, a police party was on patrol duty. At about 5:50 pm, a confidential information was received that a vehicle as described in the information was coming from Timber Trail Parwanoo and proceeding towards Solan. The information was also to the effect that the vehicle had thtree occupants carrying heroin and that search of the vehicle at that point of time could result in recovery of huge quantity of the contraband.

3(ii). Information was treated as reliable. Provisions of Section 42(2) of the NDPS Act were complied with. Search party was duly constituted. It proceeded on the spot described in the information. On noticing the vehicle indicated in the information, the same was signalled to stop. The vehicle had three occupants. The person sitting on the driver seat disclosed his name as Ravi Sharma (petitioner). The lady sitting on the adjoining seat gave her name as Priya, whereas the person occupying the back seat gave his name as Nishant Thakur. During search of the vehicle carried out in accordance with law, a plastic pouch kept in the dashboard was found, from which heroin weighing 16 grams was recovered. The recovery led to registration of the FIR and arrest of all three occupants of the vehicle.

3(iii). During investigations, petitioner stPatedly disclosed that he was habitual of consuming heroin since the year 2014. He was a Taxi Driver and used to procure heroin from Chandigarh/Delhi/Manali as and when he visited these places. He is further stated to have disclosed having known co-accused Nishant Thakur and Priya for about 3-4 years and that ont 26.03.2023, he alongwith the co-accused persons had gone to Manimajra in a vehicle belonging to father of the co-accused Nishant Thakur. That he (petitioner) procured 16 grams of heroin from a person in Manimajra on paying Rs.35,000/- in cash, out of which Rs.15,000/- were contributed by the co-accused persons. On their return journey to Shimla, their vehicle was intercepted by the police, which led to recovery of the contraband and registration of the FIR.

3(iv). As per the status report, the co-accused persons have also confirmed the above narration of events in the investigations carried out by the respondent from them. According to the respondent, the petitioner was taken to the spot disclosed by him for identifying the person from whom the contraband was statedly procured, however, the said person could not be identified.

4. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is behind the bars for past more than seven months.