SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(HP) 2365

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KAINTHLA
HANS RAJ – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF HP – Respondent
CRMPM/561/2026



Petitioner Advocates:Abhishek Barowalia Vishav Vijay Singh Nikhil Ghonkrokta ,Respondent Advocate: AG AG

##PAGE1##

2026:HHC:15385

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

Cr. MP(M) No. 561 of 2026

Reserved on: 04.05.2026

Date of Decision: 08.05.2026.

Hans Raj …. Petitioner

Versus

State of HP …. Respondent

Coram

Hon’ble Mr Justice Rakesh Kainthla, Judge.

Whether approved for reporting?1 No.

For the Petitioner : Mr Nikhil Ghonkrokta, Advocate.

For the Respondent/State: Mr Ajit Sharma, Deputy Advocate

General.

Rakesh Kainthla, Judge

H The petitioner has filed the present petition for

seeking regular bail in FIR No. 24 of 2024 dated 21.04.2024

registered at Police Station Kumarsain, District Shimla, H.P., for

the commission of an offence punishable under Section 20 of the

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985

(hereinafter referred to as “NDPS”).

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

::: Downloaded on - 08/05/2026 16:46:55 :::CIS

##PAGE2##

2

2026:HHC:15385

2. It has been asserted that, as per the prosecution, the

police stopped a bus bearing registration No. HP-06A-1557 at

Jabli near Kingal on 21.04.2024 at 9:30 AM. The petitioner was

stated to be occupying seat No.1, and he got frightened after

seeing the police. The police checked the bag being carried by the

petitioner in the presence of the witnesses and recovered 1 kg

229 grams of charas. The police seized the charas and arrested

the petitioner. The petitiouner had filed the bail petitions before

this Court, which weroe registered as Cr.MP(M) No. 1140 of 2025

and Cr.MP(M) CNo. 2120 of 2025, and were dismissed on

04.06.2025 and 15.09.2025, respectively. The statements of

prosecution witnesses have been recorded. Two witnesses have

not supported the prosecution case. The case of the prosecution

H is false, and there is nothing to connect the petitioner to the

commission of a crime. The petitioner would abide by the terms

and conditions that may be imposed by the Court. Hence, the

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. HP-

06A-1557 at 9:30 a.m. They found the petitioner occupying seat

::: Downloaded on - 08/05/2026 16:46:55 :::CIS

##PAGE3##

3

2026:HHC:15385

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 1kg and 229 grams of charas.

Statements of all the witnesses have been recorded, and the

matter was listed on 28.04.2026 for recording the statements of

defence witnesses. The petitioner would indulge in the

commission of a similar offuence in case of his release on bail. The

quantity of charas fouond in the possession of the petitioner was

commercial. ThCe narcotic adversely affects society, and the

petitioner would indulge in the commission of a similar offence

in case of his release on bail. Hence, the status report.

4. I have heard Mr Nikhil Ghonkrokta, learned counsel

for the petitioner and Mr Ajit Sharma, learned Deputy Advocate

General for the respondent/State.

5. Mr Nikhil Ghonkrokta, learned counsel for the

petitioner, submitted that the petitioner is innocent and that he

was falsely implicated. The petitioner has been behind the bars

since 21.04.2024. More than two years have elapsed since the

arrest of the petitioner. The police have filed the chargesheet,

::: Downloaded on - 08/05/2026 16:46:55 :::CIS

##PAGE4##

4

2026:HHC:15385

and no fruitful purpose would be served by detaining the

petitioner in custody. The petitioner would abide by the terms

and conditions that the Court may impose. Hence, he prayed that

the present petition be allowed and the petitioner be released on

bail.

6. Mr Ajit Sharma, learned Deputy Advocate General for

the respondent/State, submitted that the petitioner was found in

possession of a commercial quantity of charas. He had

approached this Court earlier, and his bail petitions were

dismissed. A subsequent bail petition only lies when there is a

change in the circu

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top