IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr.MP(M) No.1487 of 2025 Date of Decision:02.09.2025 Maja Ram ...Petitioner Versus Narcotics Control Bureau ...Respondent Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Satyen Vaidya, Judge Whether approved for reporting? . For the petitioner: Mr. Anirudh Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Ashwani Pathak, Senior Advocate with Mr.Dev Raj, Advocate. Satyen Vaidya, Judge The instant application has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023, for grant of bail in case registered vide NCB Crime No.75/2022 dated 05.11.2022 under Sections 8, 20, 29 & 60 of the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Drugs Act, 1985 (for short, the ND&PS Act”) registered at NCB Sub-Zone, Mandi, District Mandi, Himachal Pradesh. 2. The petitioner was arrested on 05.11.2022 and after initial police custody, is lodged in judicial custody till date. 3. The only ground on which the application is being pressed is the undue delay in conclusion of the trial and as a consequence the violence to the constitutional right of petitioner to speedy trial. 2 4. The status report filed by the respondent reveals that the petitioner is facing trial for allegation of being in conscious possession of 8.742 Kms of charas. He was allegedly apprehended with two persons, namely, Sukh Dev and Harneet Kaur in a vehicle with registration No. PH-13-AR-7929 at Bhiuli Pul, Mandi on 05.11.2022 at about 6:20 AM. 5. On 10.07.2025, this Court had passed the following order: “Status report has been filed, which reveals that till date 4 out of 11 cited prosecution witnesses have been examined. The matter has now been fixed by the learned trial Court for examination of remaining witnesses on 27th, 28th and 29th August, 2025. The petitioner is in custody since 5.11.2022. The trial has already been delayed. Since the learned trial Court has already fixed the aforesaid dates for examination of the remaining witnesses of the prosecution, it will be appropriate to post this petition after the aforesaid dates, keeping in view the fact that the allegation against the petitioner is serious in nature. He is alleged to be in possession of more than 8 k.g. of charas, however, keeping in view the long pendency of the case, the respondent is directed to ensure that all the remaining prosecution witnesses are present before the learned trial Court on the dates fixed and their statements are recorded.” 3 6. Today, both the sides have supplied an information that only one prosecution witness has been examined on 27th, 28th and 29th August, 2025. The remaining 6 official witnesses did not appear. 7. Learned Senior Counsel representing the respondent has apprised the Court that the official witnesses were to proceed from distant places for appearing before learned trial Court, but they could not do so due to weather conditions and on such count, the applications were moved before learned trial Court seeking exemption and adjournment on their behalf. 8. A copy of order sheet dated 27.08.2025, passed by learned trial Court has been placed on record, which substantiates the contention raised by learned counsel for the respondent. That being so, it cannot be said that the prosecution witnesses were not examined intentionally by the respondent on the previous dates. 9. Now, the trial is listed before learned trial Court on 29.10.2025 for examination of remaining prospection witnesses. 10. It cannot be ignored that already a delay has taken place in conclusion of trial. The petitioner is facing incarceration since 05.11.2022. He has a right of speedy disposal of trial. 11. In the given circumstances, the petition is disposed of with direction to the respondent to ensure the presence of all 4 remaining prosecution witnesses before learned trial court on the next date of hearing and to examine them without any exception save and except a circumstance beyond the control of respondent. It is made clear that in case any of the prosecution witness is unable to appear before learned trial Court personally for making deposition, his statement shall be recorded by virtual mode and the respondent shall make all necessary arrangements for the purpose. 12. The petitioner shall be at liberty to approach this Court immediately after the next date of hearing before learned trial Court in case the prosecution witnesses are not examined. ( Satyen Vaidya ) Judge September 02, 2025 (vt)