Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(HP) 8520
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Rakesh Kainthla, J
Shiranjana Buddha – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
Cr. MP (M) No. 2439 of 2025
Important Points
Subject
Criminal Law - Bail
Act Referred
Headnote
(B) Bail - Denial based on violation of ongoing trial timelines and lack of reason for pre-trial detention is discussed - Petitioner’s clean antecedents accepted - Grant of bail ordered, subject to conditions ensuring cooperation with judicial processes. (Paras 14-17)
Facts of the case:
Petitioner, a Nepali national, is accused of being in possession of commercial quantities of opium, arrested in a bus on suspicion leading to drug recovery. The prosecution's evidence is primarily circumstantial, raising doubts about possession.
Findings of Court:
Notably, absence of sufficient evidence to justify continued detention - The nature of allegations evaluated against the backdrop of the right to liberty - Bail granted on specified conditions.
Issues: Primary consideration is the reasonable basis for determining bail eligibility in light of serious accusations and procedural lapses advocated by defense.
Ratio Decidendi: The court affirmed the principle that judicial discretion must be exercised judiciously, ensuring that the judgement on bail reflects substantive analysis of evidence, public interest, and the rights of the accused.
Result: Petition allowed; bail granted with specific conditions.
For the Appellants/Petitioners: M/s Ajay Sipahiya and Tarun Mehta
For the Respondents:Mr Jitender Sharma, Additional Advocate General
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. arguments around constitutional rights and evidential weak links. (Para 1 , 6) |
| 2. questioning evidence for possession. (Para 2 , 3 , 10) |
| 3. judicial considerations and precedents for bail. (Para 4 , 8 , 9) |
| 4. reflecting on clean antecedents and pre-trial liberty. (Para 11 , 13) |
| 5. conclusive ruling on bail terms and conditions. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
Rakesh Kainthla, Judge The petitioner has filed the present petition for seeking regular bail in F.I.R. No. 86 of 2025, dated 27.04.2025, for committing offences punishable under Sections 18 & 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (NDPS) at Police Station Sadar, Solan, District Solan, H.P.
2. It has been asserted that the petitioner is a Nepali national with clean antecedents. She was arrested on 27.04.2025. The investigation is complete, and the matter was listed for consideration of charges on 08.10.2025. The prosecution has cited 22 witnesses, and the trial is not likely to conclude soon. As per the prosecution, the police had recovered 2.544 kgs of opium from the backpack kept near the feet of the petitioner and 5.640 kgs of opium kept near the co-accused. There are discrepancies in the weight. The recovery was effected from a bus, and exclusive possession of the petitioner is not established. The grounds of arrest were not communicated to the petitioner. The police claimed recovery of 8.184 kgs of opium; however, the weight of the contraband was found to be 8.216 kgs during the proceedings under Section 52A of the NDPS Act. 9 pouches were mixed, and this defeated the provision of taking a representative sample. 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 were on patrolling duty on 27.04.2025. They received a secret information at 12:40 pm that a bus was going from Solan to Shimla. Two people were transporting opium in the bus, and they were sitting in the rear seats. A huge quantity of opium could be recovered by their search. The police reduced the information into writing and sent it to the Supervisory Officer. The police intercepted a bus bearing registration No. HP63E-0330. Two people were found sitting in the rear seat. One person identified herself as Shiranjana Buddha (petitioner), and the other person identified himself as Shankar Bahadur. Two bags were found near their feet. The police checked the backpack and recovered three pouches containing 2.544 kgs of opium in the bag kept near the petitioner’s feet. The police checked the backpack kept near the feet of Shankar Bahadur and recovered 6 pouches containing 5.640 kgs of opium. The total weight of opium was found to be 8.184 kgs. The police seized the backpack and arrested the petitioner and the co-accused. The CCTV footage from the Hotel where the petitioner and the accused had stayed was also recovered. The challan was filed before the Court on 02.07.2025. The matter is listed for consideration of the charge on 19.12.2025. Hence, the status report.
4. I have heard M/s Ajay Sipahiya and Tarun Mehta, Advocates, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr Jitender Sharma, Additional Advocate General for the respondent/State.
5. Mr Ajay Sipahiya, learned counsel for the petitioner, has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and she was falsely implicated. The grounds of arrest were not supplied to her at the time of her arrest, which is a violation of her constitutional right. The petitioner was not found in conscious possession of any opium, and the bags were found near her feet. There is no material to connect the petitioner to the bags. Hence, 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, submitted that the petitioner was found in possession of a commercial quantity of opium. Rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act apply t
