IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA Criminal Appeal No: 410 of 2015 Reserved on: 25.04.2026.

Pronounced on :06.05.2026.

__________________________________________________________

State of Himachal Pradesh ....Appellant versus Shashi Kant ....Respondent Coram:

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ranjan Sharma, Judge

1Whether approved for reporting?t For the appellant: Mr. Sushant Keprate, Additional Advocate General.

For the respondent: Mr. Kanwar Bhupinder Singh, Advocate.

Ranjan Sharma, Judge State of Himachal Pradesh, being the appellant, has come up in the instant appeal, under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, Hassailing the judgment dated 18.12.2014, passed by Learned Special Judge, Shimla [HP], in Sessions Trial No.11-S/7 of 2011, titled State of Himachal Pradesh v. Shashi Kant, acquitting the Respondent- accused herein, from the charge under Section 20 Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 [referred to as ‘NDPS Act’ herein], alleging

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

recovery of 150 grams of Cannabis-Charas from his conscious and exclusive possession on 22.10.2010 at about 03:30 p.m.

PROSECUTION STORY:

2. The prosecution story is that on 22.10.2010, ASI Madan Lal, Investing Officer, Police Post Sanjauli along with Head Constable oRamesh Chand No.136, HC Surinder No.98, Const able Anoop No.499, HHC Ramesh Chand No.1r403 and Constable Jyoti Lal No.904 were on patrolling duty and while they were present near Military Gate at about 03:30 p.m. on 22.10.2010, they noticed a person [Respondent herein ], aged 23-24 years near an under construction building. On noticing the police, the said person was hiding behind a pillar by putting his hands Hin his rear pocket. Based on his activities, suspicion arose in mind of Investigating Officer, ASI Madan Lal that he might be having some objectionable material/contraband in his possession. The aforesaid person was nabbed by the police. Two independent witnesses, namely, Chaman Sharma and Hemant were associated. On inquiry, the accused disclosed his name as Shashi Kant [Respondent herein]. Thereafter, the consent of the accused was obtained for personal search before the police and as per the option given, the personal search o.f accused was conducted, wherein, the police found a polythene envelope from his trousers/jeans. On opening the polythene envelope, a black substance in the shape of balls as well as sticks was found, which on smelling and testing, was found to be Cannabis- Charas. The contraband was weighed and found to be 150 grams. Proceedings of seizure-recovery were photographed and contraband was sealed in presence of witnesses. Thereafter, a Rukka was sent to the police station, which led to the registration of FIR No. 187 of 2010. Pursuant to the registration Hof FIR, the Respondent-Shashi Kant was arrested.

After completing all codal formalities, the seized contraband was sent to Forensic Science Laboratory, Junga. Investigation was completed and the Challan was filed in the Court, which led to commencement of the trial.

2(i). Pursuant to the trial conducted by Learned Special Judge, Shimla, Respondent-Accused [Shashi Kant] was acquitted on 18.12.2014 [referred to as the ‘Impugned Judgement’], with the findings that once the contraband was recovered from the trousers /jeans of the respondent-accused during personal search and the personal search was conducted the police by giving option(s) for personal search before Police or Gazetted Officer or a Magistrate revealed non-compliance of Section 50 of the NDPS Act, when, the statute contemplates that the personal search is to be conducted either before a nearest Gazetted Officer or a nearest Magistrate. It was held that option given for personal search before the police, who were the member(s) of raiding party, frustrates Hthe provision of Section 50 of the NDPS Act. It was further held that no endeavor was made by the police to