Azad vs State Of Himachal Pradesh - 2026 Supreme(Online)(HP) 2983

Headnote Court Copy Facts Arguments Court observation Judicial Analysis Case Map Category Hierarchy Table of Content

2026 Supreme(Online)(HP) 2983

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Virender Singh, Judge
Azad – Appellant
Versus
State Of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
CrMP(M) No. : 782 of 2026

Important Points

In cases involving commercial quantities of narcotics under the NDPS Act, the court cannot grant bail unless the applicant satisfies the mandatory twin conditions of Section 37, establishing reasonable grounds for innocence and a high probability of refraining from future criminal activities while on bail.

Subject

Criminal Law - Bail/Anticipatory Bail

Act Referred

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023: S.483
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985: S.22, S.29, S.37, S.42(2), S.52A, S.54, S.67
Constitution of India: Art.22(1)
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: S.439

Headnote

(A) Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Section 37 - Grant of bail - Commercial quantity - Rigors of Section 37 apply to commercial quantity offences - Applicant failed to demonstrate satisfaction of twin conditions for bail - No evidence to suggest applicant was not guilty or likely to remain law-abiding - Bail application dismissed. (Paras 12-15, 20, 22)

(B) Constitution of India - Article 22(1) - Arrest guidelines - Requirement of written communication of grounds of arrest applies prospectively from November 6, 2025, per Supreme Court ruling - Arrest in August 2024 does not benefit from prospective ruling. (Para 21)

Facts of the case:
The applicant sought bail for his involvement in an incident involving the possession of a commercial quantity of Spasmo Promax Plus capsules recovered on August 26, 2024. The applicant argued his innocence, pointed to the completion of the investigation, the failure of witnesses to support the prosecution, and lack of written grounds of arrest. The trial court had previously denied his bail.

Findings of Court:
The court held that as the recovered contraband is of commercial quantity, the stringent requirements of Section 37 of the NDPS Act must be satisfied. The court noted that the applicant failed to satisfy the twin conditions of being innocent and not likely to commit further offenses. Furthermore, the claim regarding the lack of written grounds for arrest was rejected as the governing precedent for such mandatory written communication has prospective application and did not apply to the 2024 arrest.

Issues: Whether the applicant is entitled to bail under the NDPS Act despite holding a commercial quantity of contraband, and whether the absence of written grounds for his 2024 arrest warrants bail.

Ratio Decidendi: The court maintained that the statutory mandate under Section 37 of the NDPS Act is a prerequisite for bail in commercial quantity cases. It emphasized that without reasonable grounds to believe an applicant is not guilty and is unlikely to repeat the offense, bail must be denied, and the procedural requirement for written arrest communication is not retroactive.

Result: Bail application dismissed.

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Rakesh Kumar Chaudhary, Panku Chaudhary
For the Respondents: H.S. Rawat, Ranjna Patial

(Oral)

Virender Singh, Judge.

1. Applicant-Azad, by way of the present application, filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘BNSS’), has sought his release, on bail, during the pendency of the trial, arising out of FIR No.126 of 2024, dated 26^th August, 2024, registered under Sections 22 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘NDPS Act’), with Police Station Puruwala, District Sirmaur, H.P.

2. According to the applicanft, he is innocent and has falsely been implicated, in this case.

3. It is the caset of the applicant that the investigation, in the present case, is complete, against him, as such, no useful purpose would be served by keeping him in the judicial custody.

4. Highlighting the fact that the chances of the chonclusion of the trial, against the applicant, in near gfuture, are not so bright, it has been prayed that even the iprosecution witnesses, who have been examined as PWs-9 and 10, have not supported the case of the prosecution.

5. Apart from this, relief of bail has also been sought on the ground that the grounds of arrest have not been furnished to him, as such, according to him, there is violation of his fundamental right, envisaged under Article 22 (1) of the Constitution of India.

6. The long period of incarceration of about one year and eight months has also been put forth by the applicant, as one of the grounds to seek the relief of bail.

7. The applicant has earlier tried his luck by moving similar application, before fthe Court of learned Special Judge (II), Nahan, District Sirmaur, H.P., however, his application has been dismissed on 21^st November, 2025.

8. Apart from this, the learned counsel appearing for the applicant have given certain undertakings, on behalf of the applicant, for which, the applicant is ready to ahbide by, in case, ordered to be released, on bail, during gthe pendency of the trial.

i8. On all these submissions, a prayer has been made to allow the bail application.

9. When, put to notice, police has filed the status report, disclosing therein, that on 26^th August, 2024, ASI Yashpal, alongwith other police official, while on patrolling duty, as well as, duty to detect the crime, relating to excise and narcotics, proceeded towards Bhangani, Mehruwala. When, the police party was present at Mehruwala, then, at about 06.10 pm, he received a secret information qua the fact that three persons, on Motorcycle No. HP 17D 2648, are coming from Bhangani side. In the secret information, the names of those persons have been mentioned as Azad (applicant) and two other Children fin Conflict with Law (hereinafter referred to as CCL-1 and CCL-2).

9.1. As per the secrtet information, one of the CCL was having a black and blue coloured rucksack and in case, the persons, named in the secret information, are nabbed and searched, then large quantity of prohibited capsules could be recovered. The said information, ahccording to the IO, was found to be authentic and reliable, gand, in case, efforts were made to get the search iwarrants, then, in that eventuality, there was every possibility of all the three persons fleeing from there. As such, he complied with the provisions of Section 42 (2) of the NDPS Act and submitted the information to SDPO Paonta Sahib, through Constable Kapil Sharma, No. 575, at 05.30 pm.

9.2. Thereafter, IO had reached Panchayat Office Gojar, where, two persons were found standing on the road side, who, on inquiry, disclosed their names as Sonu and Anil Kumar. Both of them were apprised about the secret information received by the IO and they were associated as independent witnesses. Thereafter, the IO put the picketing. At about 06.55 pm, as per the information, Motorcycle bearing registration No. HP 17D 2648, being driven by its driver reached there. Three persons were theure on the motorcycle. Rider of the motorcycle, oon seeing the police, at once, tried to turn back