2025:HHC:24913 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr. MP (M) No.1119/2025. Date of Decision: 29th July, 2025. Harpreet Singh @ Jimmi .....Petitioner. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh …..Respondent. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Bipin Chander Negi, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Kulwant Singh Gill, Advocate. For the Respondent: Mr. Munish Thakur, Dy. Advocate General. Bipin Chander Negi, Judge (oral). The present bail petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) for grant of regular bail. The same arises out of FIR No.124 of 2024, dated 23.07.2024, registered at Police Station Sadar Solan, District Solan, Himachal Pradesh, under Sections 21 and 29 of the NDPS Act. 2. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the status report. 3. The FIR, in the case at hand, was lodged on 23.07.2024. As per the FIR, the police party, in the case at hand, received credible information qua two individuals namely Rajeev Gupta and Amit Rawat. As per the information received, they were stated to be in vehicle bearing No.HP-14E-0454 (Swift) Grey Colour vehicle, which was stated to be parked outside Sugandha Apartment Block-C on Power House Saprun Road. It was alleged in the information received that the 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2025:HHC:24913 aforesaid two individuals are in the business of buying and selling heroin/chitta. 4. Based on the information, the two individuals were apprehended. On search 18.51 grams of chitta/heroin was recovered. The aforesaid two individuals were enlarged on bail on 22.10.2024. The present bail petitioner was apprehended on the basis of disclosure statement made by the aforesaid two accused while in custody. 5. Investigation, in the case at hand, is complete. Chargesheet was filed on 19.09.2024. The matter is now listed for consideration on 12.08.025, before the learned Special Judge-III, Solan, HP. In all, there are 24 witnesses are to be examined on commencement of trial. 6. The Hon’ble Apex Court in Tofan Singh Vs. State of Tamil Nadu, 2021 (4) SCC 1, has authoritatively pronounced that a confession made to the police officer during the investigation is hit by Section 25 of the Indian Evidence Act and is not saved by the provisions of Section 67 of the NDPS Act. Hence, no advantage can be derived by the prosecution from the confessional statement made by the co-accused implicating the petitioner during the investigation. 7. The petitioner, in the case at hand, can be sentenced to a maximum imprisonment of 10 years. However, one cannot lose sight of the fact that the sentence has to be proportionate to the commission of the offence. Keeping in view the 3 2025:HHC:24913 proportionality of the sentence, which at best can be imposed upon the petitioner post-conclusion of trial and the period for which the bail petitioner has been behind bars, the petitioner deserves to be enlarged on bail. 8. The petitioner, in the case at hand, was arrested on 27.07.2024. He is presently lodged in judicial custody. Trial has to yet to commence, as the case is listed for consideration of charge on 12.08.2025. Right to speedy trial is a fundamental right guaranteed to the petitioner under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. 9. The bail petitioner, in the case at hand, is facing trial in three other cases of NDPS also. The bail petitioner has been convicted in one case. The criminal history of the bail petitioner though an important factor in adjudicating the present bail petitioner, but the same has also to be considered in the context of the punishment, which on a conviction, in the case at hand, can best be imposed on the bail petitioner. 10. At the time of deciding the bail petition, a detailed discussion of evidence so collected and produced by the prosecution, is to be avoided, as it may cause prejudice to the case of the prosecution or to the case of the accused/applicant. 11. Trial is going to take time for its conclusion. Pre-trial incarceration is not the rule. Further detention of the accused would not serve any fruitful purpose, rather would prove pre- judicial to the rights of the petitioner. 4 2025:HHC:24913 12. Punishment begins after conviction. A person in detention is subjected to psychological and physical deprivations of jail. Further, a jailed individual is prevented from contributing to the preparation of his defence. 13. The object of bail is to secure the attendance of the accused person at his trial by reasonable amount of bail. The object of bail is neither punitive nor preventive. 14. Petitioner is permanent resident of Village Makori Khurd, PO Ghanauli, Tehsil and District Ropar, Punjab. The respondent/State has not expressed any apprehension regarding him fleeing from the justice and adversely affecting the trial. In any case, the petitioner can be put to terms for the purposes of safe, secure and unobstructed completion of trial. 15. Hence, after going through the material available on record and considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, this Court finds that the present is a fit case where judicial discretion to admit the petitioner on bail is required to be exercised in his favour. 16. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed and it is ordered that the petitioner, who has been arrested by the police, in FIR No.124 of 2024, dated 23.07.2024, registered at Police Station Nalagarh, District Solan, Himachal Pradesh, under Sections 21 and 29 of NDPS Act, shall be forthwith released on bail, subject to his furnishing personal bond to the tune of Rs.1,00,000/- [Rupees One lac] with one local surety in the like 5 2025:HHC:24913 amount, to the satisfaction of learned trial Court. However, this bail order is subject to the following conditions:-. (i) Petitioner shall attend the trial Court on each and every date of hearing and if prevented by any reason to do so, seek exemption from appearance by filing appropriate application; (ii) Petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence or hamper the investigation in any manner whatsoever; (iii) Petitioner will not leave India without prior permission of the Court; (iv) Petitioner shall not make any inducement, threat or promise, directly or indirectly, to the victim and Investigating Officer or any person acquainted with the facts of the case to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or any Police Officer; (v) Petitioner shall inform the Station House Officer of the concerned police station about his place of residence during bail and trial. Any change in the same shall also be communicated within two weeks thereafter. Petitioner shall furnish details of his Aadhar Card, Telephone Number, Email, PAN Card, Bank Account Number, if any; & (vi) It is made clear that in case petitioner is arraigned as an accused, in future, in any FIR, then his bail is liable to be cancelled. It is open for the Investigating Agency to move appropriate application in that regard. 17. Needless to say that the Investigating Agency shall be at liberty to move this Court for cancellation of the bail, if any of the aforesaid conditions are violated by the petitioner. 18. Be it stated that any expression of opinion given in this order does not mean an expression of opinion on the merits of the case and the trial Court will not be influenced by any observations made therein. 19. The Registry is directed to forward a soft copy of the bail order to the Superintendent, Sub Jail Solan, District Solan, H.P., through email, with a direction to enter the date of grant of bail in the e-prison software. 6 2025:HHC:24913 20. In case, the petitioner is not released within a period of seven days from the date of grant of bail, the Superintendent, Sub Jail Solan, District Solan, H.P., is directed to inform this fact to the Secretary, DLSA, Solan. The Superintendent, Sub Jail Solan, District Solan, H.P., is further directed that if the petitioner fails to furnish the bail bonds, as per the order passed by this Court, within a period of one month from today, the said fact be submitted to this Court. 21. The petition stands accordingly disposed of. 22. A downloaded copy of this order shall be accepted by the learned Trial Court, while accepting the bail bonds from the petitioner and, in case, said Court intends to ascertain the veracity of the downloaded copy of the order presented to it, the same may be ascertained from the official website of this Court. (Bipin Chander Negi) Judge 29th July, 2025 (Gaurav Rawat)