1. ( 2025:HHC:22349 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA Cr.MP(M) No.1602 of 2025 Date of Decision: 08.07.2025 Prakash Chand …Applicant Versus State of H.P. …..Respondent Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the applicant : Mr. Munish Datwalia, Advocate. For the respondent : Mr Anup Rattan, Advocate General, with Mr. Tejasvi Sharma, Mr. Varun Chandel, Additional Advocates General, Ms. Ranjna Patial and Mr. Rohit Sharma, Deputy Advocate General, for the respondent/State. Virender Singh, Judge Applicant-Prakash Chand, has filed the present application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘BNSS’), as he is apprehending his arrest, in case, arising out of FIR No.44 of 2025, dated 11.04.2025, registered under Section 18 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. ( 2025:HHC:22349 ) Substances Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘NDPS Act’), with Police Station, BSL Colony Sundernagar, Tehsil Sundernagar, District Mandi, H.P. 2. By way of the present application, indulgence of this Court has been sought to direct the IO/Police of Police Station BSL Colony Sundernagar, Tehsil Sundernagar, District Mandi, H.P. to release him on bail, in the event of his arrest, in the above titled case. 3. The relief of bail has been sought on the ground that the applicant is a law abiding citizen and having no criminal antecedents. 4. According to the applicant, he has falsely been implicated in this case for allegedly cultivating 210 opium plants, on the land situated in Mohal Chauri, Tehsil Nihri, District Mandi, H.P. 5. According to the applicant, land bearing Khasra No.28, is not exclusively owned, possessed and cultivated by the applicant. In this regard, he has relied upon the Jamabandi for the year 2021-22. 6. According to the applicant, the said land is recorded as joint ownership of forty individuals and no part 3. ( 2025:HHC:22349 ) of the revenue record reflects the exclusive possession or control by the applicant. 7. It is the further case of the applicant that nothing is to be recovered from the possession of the applicant, nor, at his instance. 8. 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 this case. 9. According to the applicant, he had earlier tried his luck by moving similar application, before the Court of learned Special Judge, Sunderngar, District Mandi, H.P., however, the said application was dismissed, vide order dated 01.07.2025. 10. On the basis of the above facts, Munish Datwalia, Advocate, appearing for the applicant, has given certain undertakings, on behalf of the applicant, for which, the applicant is ready to abide by, in case, any direction is issued to the IO/Police of Police Station BSL Colony, Tehsil Sundernagar, District Mandi, H.P., to release the applicant on bail, in the event of his arrest, in the above titled case. 4. ( 2025:HHC:22349 ) 11. In order to butters his contentions, the learned counsel appearing for the applicant, has relied upon the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Cr.MP(M) No.363 of 2024 and prayed that the relief as claimed may kindly be given to him. 12. When put to notice, the police has filed the status report disclosing therein, that on 10.04.2025, HC Narotam Ram No. 111, under the leadership of SI Mahender Singh Incharge, Police Post, Nihri, District Mandi, were on patrolling duty and duty to detect the crime relating to narcotic drugs in the area. When, the IO Narotam Ram No.111, under the leadership of SI Manender Singh, and other police officials was present at place known as Valag, then, at about 3.50 PM , a secret information was received disclosing therein that in village Chauri, the villagers had illegally cultivated opium plants and in case, raid is conducted, a large quantity of cultivation of opium plants could be found there, upon which, IO Narotam Ram, prepared the information under Section 42(2) of NDPS Act and submitted the same through Whatsapp to SDPO, Sundernagar, District Mandi, H.P. 5. ( 2025:HHC:22349 ) 12.1. Thereafter, the police party had proceeded towards the spot. On the way, independent witnesses, namely Daya Ram, Pradhan, Gram Panchayat, Valag, Kishori Lal and Halka Patwari, Nandi were associated. Halka Patwari was directed to make the report with regard to illegal cultivation of the opium. Thereafter, in the presence of police, the opium plants were counted, which, on counting, were found to be a 210 plants. Thereafter, the application was moved before the SDPO, Sundernagar, through Whatsapp to destroy the opium plants, upon which, SDPO Sundernagar, directed to collect the samples and remaining plants were directed to be destroyed, upon which, five plants along with roots were uprooted and separated, out of the 210 plants and were put in a white coloured plastic sack. Rest of the plants were destroyed. 12.2. Thereafter, FIR in question was registered and investigation was started. The Halka Patwari was directed to submit the report with regard to illegal cultivation of opium plants. On 17.04.2025, revenue record was obtained, according to which, land bearing Khasra No.268, out of the area Khasra No.28, measuring 5 Bighas, 13 Biswas, 16 Biswansi, cultivation of opium was found over 6. ( 2025:HHC:22349 ) the land measuring 1 biswa, and as per the record, the said Khasra number was owned by State of Himachal Pradesh, however, persons namely, Briju, Longu, Variya Bhikam sons of Shibu were found to be recorded, as in unauthorized possession. 12.3. On 19.04.2025, a request was made to Tehsildar, Nihri to prepare the Tatima of the area. Thereafter, on 14.05.2025, demarcation was got conducted in the presence of all the affected parties. As per the demarcation, the illegal cultivation of opium was found to be in Khasra No.28. 12.4. On 02.06.2025, statement of Dharam Dass Clerk/Record Keeper was recorded. As per the record, Khasra No.28 measuring 5 Bighas, 13 Biswas, 16 Biswansi, was found to be in ownership of Himachal Pradesh and in the column of possession names of Briju, Longu, Varia, Bhikam, all sons of Shibu Ram have been recorded. 12.5. It is the further case of the police that the demarcation so conducted by Shri Raj Kumar, Kanungo, was duly accepted by the persons, who were present there. The demarcation was conducted in the presence of police officials, officials from Forest Department in local 7. ( 2025:HHC:22349 ) inhabitants. As per the demarcation, the place, where the cultivation of opium was found to be in Khasra No.28. Thereafter the copy of the demarcation was obtained and the statement of the Record Keeper was recorded. As per the demarcation report, the persons namely Briju, Longu, Varia, Bhikam, were found to be recorded in their unauthorized possession. Prakash Chand found to be in cultivating possession on the basis of family settlement. In this regard, the statements of their family members were recorded. 12.6. On the basis of the above facts, it has been apprehended that the applicant is clever person and in case, relief as, claimed in the application is granted to him, he may not be available for the trial and may also coerce the witnesses. Not only this, according to the police, he may indulge in the same activities. 13. On the basis of the above facts a prayer has been made to dismiss the application. 14. Heard. 15. The applicant has been named as accused in a case registered under Section 18 of NDPS Act for allegedly cultivating 250 opium plants. It has been argued by the 8. ( 2025:HHC:22349 ) learned Additional Advocate General that they can be no wild growth of opium plants and the area, in which, the cultivation of opium plants was found to be in the cultivating possession of applicant, as per the revenue record, as well as, according to the statements of the co- sharers recorded during the investigation. Moreover, at this stage, apprehensions, which have been expressed by the police cannot be said to be unfounded. 16. When there is direct allegations against the applicant with regard to the cultivation of the 210 opium plants, in such situation, passing any order in favour of the applicant, under Section 482 of BNSS would give wrong signal to the society that after committing such a heinous crime, the applicant is moving freely in the society. Even otherwise, his release will encourage other people to take the law in their hands and indulge in the same activities. 17. Considering the role attributed to the applicant, as per the status report, this Court is of the view that the applicant is not able to make out a case in his favour, wherein any direction can be issued to the police under Section 482 of the BNSS. Consequently, the present application is dismissed. 9. ( 2025:HHC:22349 ) 18. Any of the observations, made hereinabove, 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. (Virender Singh) Judge July 08, 2025 (subhash)