A successive bail application can only be entertained if there is a material change in circumstances; otherwise, it is deemed a review of the earlier order, which is impermissible in criminal law.

Whether approved for reporting? No.¹1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes.

H The petitioner has filed the present petition for seeking regular bail in FIR No. 234 of 2024 dated 21.11.2024 registered at Police Station Balh, District Mandi, H.P., for the commission of an offence punishable under Section 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (hereinafter referred to as NDPS).

2. It has been asserted that, as per the prosecution, the police received secret information on 21.11.2024 at 3:45 PM that the petitioner was selling heroin. The police searched the petitioner’s room and recovered heroin weighing 203.1 grams. The petitioner has been in custody for more than one year and four months. The petitioner had filed a bail petition, which was registered as Cr.MP(M) 644 of 2025 and was withdrawn on 01.04.2025. This Court hadu granted interim bail to the petitioner in Cr.MP(M) No. 1288o of 2025 for three weeks. The petitioner was released on 28.0C6.2025, and he surrendered on 18.07.2025. The petitioner approached the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in SLP Criminal No. 12554 of 2025, which was dismissed on 10.11.2025. The petitioner again filed a petition for regular bail, which was H registered as Cr.MP(M) No. 2910 of 2025 and was dismissed by this Court on 09.01.2026. The petitioner again approached the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in SLP (Criminal) No. 1387 of 2026, which was withdrawn on 30.01.2026. The investigation is complete, and the charge sheet has been filed before the Court on 18.01.2025. The quantity of heroin stated to have been found in the petitioner’s possession was intermediate, and the rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act do not apply to the present case. Five FIRs have been registered against the petitioner. The petitioner would abide by the terms and conditions that the Court may impose. Hence, 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 21.11.2024. They received secret information near Bagla, Gagal Link Road at 3.45 PM that the petitioner was selling heroin, and in case of his search, a huge quantity of heroin could be recovered. The police reduced the information into writing and sent it to the Sub Divisional Police OfÏcer (SDPO). The police associated Pawan Kumar and Hema Devi and went to the petitioner’s house, where he was present. The police searched the house in the presence of independent witnesses and recovered ₹900/- and 203.1 grams of heroin. The police arrested the petitioner and seized the heroin, which was sent to the FSL and as per the result, it was confirmed to be a sample of Diacetylmorphine. The charge sheet was filed before the Court, and the matter is listed for the prosecution's evidence. FIR Nos. 178/2006, 134/2013, 428/2020, 17/2023, and 208/2023 have been registered against the petitioner. The petitioner would indulge in the commission of a similar offence in case of his release on bail. The matter is listed for recording the statements of prosecution witnesses on 19.05.2026. Hence, the status report.

4. I have heard Mr Manish Kansra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr Jitender Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General for the respondent/State.

5. Mr Manish Kansrar, learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he was falsely implicated. The police have filed the charge sheet, and no fruitful purpose would be served by detaining the petitioner in