IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr. MP(M) No. 2120 of 2025 Reserved on: 09.09.2025 Date of Decision: 15.09.2025.

Hans Raj .…Petitioner Versus State of H.P. o ....Respondent Coram Hon’ble Mr Justice Ra kesh Kainthla, Judge.

Whether approved for reporting?1 No For the petitioner : Mr. Abhishek Barowalia, o Advocate.

For the Mr. Prashant Sen, Deputy reCspondent/State. Advocate General with HASI Pyare Lal, No. 1517 P.S. Kumarsain, District Shimla, H.P.

h____________________________________

Rakesh Kainthla, Judge The petitioner has filed the present petition for seeking regular bail in FIR No. 0024 of 2024, dated 21.04.2024, registered for the commission of an offence punishable under Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (“in short NDPS Act”), at P.S. Kumarsain, District Shimla, H.P.

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

2. It has been asserted that, as per the prosecution's case, the petitioner was found in possession of 1 kg 229 grams of Charas. The petitioner was falsely implicated. There is nothing on record to show that the search of any of the passengers was conducted. The quantity of the contraband is just above the intfermediate quantity. The Chemical Analyst stated that the presence of cannabinoids, including tetrahydrocannabinol, was detected. There is no mention of the resin of the cannabis plant, concentrated preparation and the resin known as hashish oil or liquid hashish; therefore, the substance cannot be said to be Charas. The petitioner had earlier filed two bail petitions before this Court, which were registered as Cr. MP(M) No. 1909 of 2024 and Cr.MP(M)No. 1140 of 2025, and they were dismissed on 30.09.2024 and 04.06.2025, respectively.

H Statements of seven witnesses have been recorded, two witnesses have given up, and only one witness remains to be examined. Hence, the present petition.

3. The petition is opposed by filing a status report asserting that the police party was on patrolling duty on 21.04.2024. They checked a bus bearing registration No. HP06A-1557 at 9:30 a.m. They found the petitioner occupying seat No.1, having a backpack on his lap. He tried to conceal the backpack after seeing the police. The police became suspicious and searched the petitioner in the presence of the driver and conductor. The police recovered 1 kg and 229 grams of charas. The Police filed the charge sheet before the Court on 19.07.20f24. The prosecution cited 11 witnesses, and the prosecution evidence has been completed on 08.09.2025. Now, the matter is fixed for recording the statement of the accused under Section 313 of The Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C) on 29.10.2025. The petitioner would indulge in the commission of a similar offence in case of his release on bail. He was found in possession of a commercial quantity of Charas. Releasing him on bail would encourage the drug peddlers to commit similar offences. Hence, it was prayed that the present petition be dismissed.

4. I have heard Mr. Abhishek Barowalia, learned counsel, for the petitioner and Mr. Prashant Sen, learned Deputy Advocate General, for the respondent/State.

5. Mr. Abhishek Barowalia, learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that the statements of all prosecution witnesses have been recorded. The statement of Investigating Officer shows that there is a discrepancy in the weight of the contraband. The Investigating Officer had not associated the passengers of the bus as witnesses. Therefore, he prayed that the present petition be allowed and the petitioner be released on bail.

6. Mr. Prashant Sen, lefarned Deputy Advocate General, for the respondent/State, submitted that the prosecution associatedt two independent witnesses, and it was not necessary to associate the passengers of the bus. The petitioner had earlier filed two bail petitions, which were dismissed by this Court. Subsequent bail petition lies on the change in circumstances, but there is no change in the circumsta