2025:HHC:41249

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA.

Cr.MP(M) No. 2613 of 2025

Decided on 02.12.2025

___________________________________________________

Manish Kumar ……….. petitioner

Versus

State of H.P.

……….respondent

____________________________________________________

Coram:

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Bipin Chander Negi, Judge

Whether approved for reporting? ¹

For the petitioner : Mr. N.S. Chandel, Sr. Advocate,

with Mr. Sidharth, Advocate.

For the respondent : Mr. B.N. Sharma, Additional

Advocate General.

: ASI Surinder Pal, Police Line

Chamba, District Chamba, H.P.

____________________________________________________

Bipin Chander Negi, Judge ( oral)

Status report stands filed and the same is taken on

record.

2. The present bail petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) for grant of regular bail, arising out of FIR No.110 of 2024 dated 04.04.2024, registered at Police Station, Sadar, Chamba District Chamba H.P., for an offence punishable under Sections 20 & 29

of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

3. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and

perused the status report.

1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

4. In the case at hand, the quantity involved is commercial quantity. The main ground raised by the petitioner for seeking release on bail in the case at hand is that the grounds of arrest were not communicated to him. I have perused the status report and the record which has been produced. From the same, it is evident that respondent/state in order to justify the communication of grounds of arrest to the bail petitioner in the case at hand are relying upon the arrest memo. In this respect, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court to judgment passed by the Apex Court in Vihaan Kumar vs. State of Haryana and another dated 6^th February 2025. Relevant extract whereof has been reproduced hereinbelow for a ready reference:-

“26 The stand taken before the High Court was that the appellant's wife was informed about the arrest. Information about the arrest is completely different from the grounds of arrest. The grounds of arrest are different from the arrest memo. The arrest memo incorporates the name of the arrested person, his permanent address, present address, particulars of FIR and Section applied, place of arrest, date and time of arrest, the name of the officer arresting the accused and name, address and phone number of the person to whom information about arrest has been given. We have perused the arrest memo in the present case. The same contains only the information stated above and not the grounds of arrest. The information about the arrest is completely different from information about the grounds of arrest. Mere information of arrest will not amount to furnishing grounds of arrest”.

5. The arrest memo in the case at hand incorporates the name of the arrested person, his permanent address, particulars of FIR and sections invoked, place of arrest, date and time of arrest, name of the officer effecting the arrest and the name and address of the person to whom information regarding the arrest has been given. In view of the authoritative pronouncement of the Apex Court in Vihaan Kumar’s case, the arrest memo in the case at hand only contains the information stated and not the grounds of arrest hence, the present petition is allowed. The arrest of the bail petitioner on 4.4.2024 in connection with FIR No. 110/2024 registered at Police Station Sadar Chamba District Chamba under Sections 20 & 29 of the ND&PS Act stands vitiated. The bail petitioner shall forthwith released and set at liberty. It is clarified that the findings of this Court that the arrest of the bail petitioner stands vitiated will not affect the merits of the charge sheet and the pending case.

6. At this juncture with respect to supplying grounds of arrest to the bail petitioner (similarly situate individual),