2025:HHC:21190 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. Cr.MP (M) No. : 1444 of 2025 Reserved on : 01st July, 2025 Decided on : 04th July, 2025 Rajesh Kumar …Applicant Versus State of Himachal Pradesh …Respondent Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the applicant : Ms. Suman Thakur & Mr. Ravinder S. Thakur, Advocates. For the respondent : Mr. Mohinder Zharaick, Additional Advocate General, with Ms. Ranjna Patial & Mr. Rohit Sharma, Deputy Advocates General. Virender Singh, Judge Applicant-Rajesh Kumar, has filed the present application, under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as 2025:HHC:21190 the 'BNSS'), with a prayer to release him on bail, during the pendency of the trial, arising out of FIR No.84 of 2025, dated 27.03.2025, registered, under Sections 21 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic 1 Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. 2 2025:HHC:21190 Substances Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘NDPS Act’), with Police Station Sadar Una, District Una, H.P. 2. According to the applicant, he is innocent person and has falsely been implicated by the Police, in this case, for allegedly possessing 11.49 grams of Chitta/Heroin. 3. The applicant has also tried his luck, by moving similar application, before the Court of learned Special Judge-II, Una, however, the said application was dismissed, vide order dated 27.5.2025. 4. Investigation, in the present case, is stated to have been completed, as such, according to the applicant, no useful purpose would be served by keeping him in judicial custody. 5. The applicant has also asserted the fact that apart from the present case, as many as, 11 cases have been registered against him and in majority of the cases, he has been acquitted by the competent Court of law. 6. The applicant has further asserted the fact that no evidence could be collected by the Police, during the 3 2025:HHC:21190 investigation of the case, to connect him with the crime, in question. 7. Apart from the above facts, Ms. Suman Thakur and Mr. Ravinder S. Thakur, Advocates, appearing for the applicant, have given certain undertakings, on behalf of the applicant, for which, the applicant is ready to abide by, in case, ordered to be released, on bail, during the pendency of the trial. 8. On the basis of the above facts, a prayer has been made to allow the application. 9. When put to notice, the police has filed the status report, disclosing therein, that on 26.03.2025, HC Yogeshdeep No.25, along with other police officials, was on patrolling duty and duty to detect crime relating to excise and gambling. During patrolling, Constable Maninder Singh No.208, Police Station Sadar Una, also joined the Police party. 9.1. At about 9.15 p.m., when, the police party was present near Government P.G. College, Una, then, HC Yogeshdeep received a secret information, regarding indulgence of Rajesh Kumar (applicant) and his companion 4 2025:HHC:21190 Devinder Rana, in the business of selling Chitta/Heroin and they have kept the Chitta in the confectionery shop of applicant Rajesh Kumar, situated in Ward No.2, Gursar Mohalla, Una, in the Chest (Galla) of the wooden counter. Both of them are present in the shop. As per the information, in case, they are nabbed, large quantity of Chitta can be recovered. 9.2. The information was found to be authentic and reliable. As per the I.O, in case, he obtains the search warrants and in case of delay, the possibility of removal of the contraband from the spot, is also there. As such, the I.O. has complied with the provisions of Section 42(2) of the NDPS Act and submitted the same to his superior officer. 9.3. Thereafter, the I.O., along with other police officials, reached at the confectionery shop of Rajesh Kumar, and outside the shop, one person was there, who was also apprised about the secret information, which the I.O. had received. On inquiry, he disclosed his name, as Gurdayal Singh son of Bishan Dass, and he was requested 5 2025:HHC:21190 to be the independent witness, to which, he had given his consent. 9.4. Thereafter, the police party, along with the independent witness, reached at the confectionery shop of Rajesh Kumar. He was found present there, along with, his companion. They were apprised about the secret information, which the I.O. had received. The police party, as well as, the independent witness, had offered their personal search to Rajesh Kumar and his companion, but, they have refused to do so. 9.5. Thereafter, the confectionery shop was searched and during search, in the chest (Galla) of the wooden counter, a transparent small plastic box was found, which, on opening, was found containing a granular shape light brown coloured substance. 9.6. The substance, on checking and on the basis of experience, was found to be heroin/ Chitta. Rajesh Kumar and Devinder Rana have also verified the said fact. On weighment, the same was found to be 11.44 grams. The said contraband was put into the same box and was taken into possession. 6 2025:HHC:21190 10. After completion of the codal formalities, the FIR was registered and the accused was arrested. Thereafter, the contraband was produced before the Court, where, the proceedings under Section 52-A of the NDPS Act, were got conducted and the contraband was sent to SFSL Junga for chemical analysis, from where, positive report has been received. 11. According to the applicant, the following cases were found to be registered against him:- i) FIR No.333/18, dated 9.7.2018, under the Excise Act, with Police Station, Una. ii) FIR No.440 of 2020, dated 3.12.2020, under NDPS Act, with Police Station Una. iii) FIR No.112 of 2023, dated 01.04.2023, under the Excise Act, with Police Station Una. iv) FIR No.01 of 2006, dated 01.01.2006, under the Excise Act, with Police Station Una. v) FIR No.350 of 2006, dated 29.07.2006, under the Excise Act, with Police Station Una. vi) FIR No.100 of 2007, dated 09.03.2007, under the Excise Act, with Police Station Una. vii) FIR No.220 of 2007, dated 24.05.2007, under the Excise Act, with Police Station Una. viii) FIR No.374 of 2007, dated 29.08.2007, under the Excise Act, with Police Station Una. 7 2025:HHC:21190 ix) FIR No.156 of 2008, dated 11.04.2008, under the Excise Act, with Police Station Una. x) FIR No.01 of 2009, dated 01.09.2009, under the Excise Act, with Police Station Una. xi) FIR No.121 of 2009, dated 03.03.2009, under the Excise Act, with Police Station Una. 12. After completion of the investigation, the charge-sheet has been prepared against the applicant and his companion and submitted in the competent Court of law, which is now listed for 31.07.2025. 13. Along with the application, the applicant has annexed the information, obtained by the wife of the applicant, under the Right to Information Act. The said information, as mentioned, is reproduced as under:- 1. FIR No. 333/18 DT. 09.07.18 U/S 39(1)(a) HP EXCISE ACT PS SADAR UNA- ACQUITTED BY LD. ACJM UNA ON DT. 14.02.24. 2. FIR NO. 01/06 DT. 01.01.06 U/S 39(1)(a) HP EXCISE ACT PS SADAR UNA-ACQUITTED BY LD. CJM UNA ON DT. 03.07.10. 3. FIR NO. 350/06 DT. 29.07.06 U/S 39(1)(a) HP EXCISE ACT PS SADAR UNA- ACQUITTED BY LD. CJM UNA ON DT. 30.08.2008. 4. FIR NO.100/07 DT. 09.03.07 U/S 39(1)(a) HP EXCISE ACT PS SADAR UNA - ACQUITTED BY LD. JMIC-1 UNA ON DT. 05.08.16. 8 2025:HHC:21190 5. FIR NO. 220/07 DT. 24.05.07 U/S 39(1)(a) HP EXCISE ACT PS SADAR UNA - ACQUITTED BY LD. JMIC-III UNA ON DT. 02.05.08 6. FIR NO.374/07 DT. 29.08.07 U/S 39(1)(a) HP EXCISE ACT PS SADAR UNA- ACQUITTED BY LD. JMIC-III UNA ON DT 24.03.12. 7. FIR NO. 156/08 DT. 11.04.08 U/S39(1)(a) HP EXCISE ACT PS SADAR UNA - PENDING IN THE LD COURT. 8. FIR NO: 01/09 DT. 01.01.09 U/S 39(1)(a) HP EXCISE ACT PS SADAR UNA- ACQUITTED BY LD. JMIC-I UNA ON DT. 28.07.16 9. FIR NO. 121/09 DT. 30.03.09 U/S 39(1)(a) HP EXCISE ACT PS SADAR UNA- ACQUITTED BY LD. CJM UNA ON DI. 01.11.12” 14. On the basis of the above facts, a prayer has been made to dismiss the application. 15. In the information, supplied to the wife of the applicant, under the Right to Information Act, the case at Sl. No.7, has been shown to be pending, whereas, according to the photocopy of the judgment of acquittal dated 26.4.012, passed by the Court No.1, Una, accused Rajesh Kumar has been acquitted in that case also. 16. When, the I.O., was directed to explain the said fact, he has submitted the explanation on 1.7.2025 and submitted that the record has not been updated and due to 9 2025:HHC:21190 the said fact, the mistake, in the information, as mentioned, in the status report, as well as, in the information supplied under the RTI Act, had occurred. 17. Considering the fact that in majority of cases, the applicant has been acquitted, this Court is of the view that merely on the basis of registration of the cases, no adverse inference can be drawn against the applicant. The applicant is presumed to be innocent until proven guilty by the competent Court of law, during trial. 18. Admittedly, the contraband allegedly recovered, in the present case, does not fall within the definition of ‘commercial quantity’, as such, rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act are not applicable, in the present case. 19. Investigation, in the present case, is complete and the police has filed the charge-sheet in the competent Court of law. From the said fact, it can be inferred that the custodial interrogation of the applicant is not required by the police. 20. The applicant was arrested on 27.3.2025, and according to the status report filed in this case, the case is now adjourned for 31.07.2025. Charges have not yet been 10 2025:HHC:21190 framed and these facts are sufficient to conclude that the chances of commencement and conclusion of trial, against the applicant, in near future, are not so bright. 21. Moreover, the application cannot be rejected as a matter of punishment as pre-trial punishment is prohibited under the law. Punishment can only be imposed, after the full fledged trial. Moreover, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the applicant in judicial custody, that too, for indefinite period. 22. Considering all these facts, this Court is of the view that the bail application is liable to be allowed and is accordingly allowed. The applicant is ordered to be released on bail, in case FIR No.84 of 2025, dated 27.03.2025, registered, under Section 21 and 29 of the NDPS Act, with Police Station, Sdar Una, District Una, H.P., on his furnishing personal bond, in the sum of Rs.50,000/-, with one surety, in the like amount, to the satisfaction of learned trial Court. 23. This order of release, however, shall be subject to the following conditions :- “a) Applicant shall regularly attend the trial Court on each and every date of hearing and if 11 2025:HHC:21190 prevented by any reason to do so, seek exemption from appearance by filing appropriate application; b) Applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence nor hamper the investigation of the case in any manner whatsoever; c) Applicant shall not make any inducement, threat or promises to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or the Police Officer; and d) Applicant shall not leave the territory of India without the prior permission of the Court.” 24. Any of the observations made herein above shall not be taken as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case as these observations are confined only to the disposal of the present bail application. 25. It is made clear that the respondent-State is at liberty to move an appropriate application, in case, any of the bail conditions is found to be violated by the applicant. 26. The Registry is directed to forward a soft copy of the bail order to the Superintendent of Jail, District Jail, Una at Bangarh, H.P., through e-mail, with a direction to enter the date of grant of bail in the e-prison software. 27. In case, the applicant is not released within a period of seven days from the date of grant of bail, 12 2025:HHC:21190 the Superintendent of Jail, District Jail, Una at Bangarh, H.P., is directed to inform this fact to the Secretary, DLSA, Una. The Superintendent of Jail, District Jail, Una at Bangarh, H.P., is further directed that if the applicant fails to furnish the bail bonds, as per the order passed by this Court, within a period of one month from today, then, the said fact be submitted to this Court. ( Virender Singh ) Judge July 04, 2025(ps) Digitally signed by KARAN SINGH KANWAR Date: 2025.07.04 15:11:24 IST