1. . ( 2025:HHC:24307 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA Cr.MP(M) No.1637 of 2025 Reserved on:- 18.07.2025 Date of Decision: 25.07.2025 Rohit Arora …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. Vijender Katoch, Advocate. For the respondent : Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Mohinder Zharaick, Additional Advocate General and Mr. Rohit Sharma, Deputy Advocate General, assisted by ASI Pradeep Kumar, Police Station, Nagrota Bagwan, District Kangra, H.P. Virender Singh, Judge By way of the present application, filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘BNSS’), applicant-Rohit Arora has sought his release, on bail, during the pendency of the trial, arising out of FIR No.60 of 2025, dated 30.04.2025, registered under Sections 21 & 29 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘NDPS Act’), with Police Station, Nagrota Bagwan, District Kangra, H.P. 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. . ( 2025:HHC:24307 ) 2. According to the applicant, he is innocent person and has falsely been implicated, in this case. 3. According to him, he is having no connection whatsoever, with the crime in question and presently, he is in judicial custody. 4. It is the further case of the applicant that he has falsely been implicated in this case, on the basis of the alleged disclosure made by co-accused, which according to the applicant, is inadmissible in evidence. According to him, no contraband has been recovered from his possession. 5. The applicant had earlier tried his luck by moving similar application, bearing CIS Registration No.204 of 2025, before the Court of learned Special Judge-I, Kangra at Dharamshala, District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh. However, the same was dismissed, vide order dated 24.06.2025. 6. Thereafter, he had filed another application, bearing Application No.1848 of 2025, before the learned Special Judge-I, Kangra at Dharamshala, District Kangra. However, the same was also dismissed as withdrawn. 7. It is the further case of the applicant that the contraband, so recovered, in this case does not fall within the 3. . ( 2025:HHC:24307 ) definition of ‘commercial quantity’. As such, rigors of Section 37 of NDPS Act, are not applicable, in the present case. 8. On the basis of the above facts, Mr. Vijender Katoch, 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, ordered to be released on bail, during the pendency of the trial. 9. On the basis of the above facts, a prayer has been made to allow the bail application. 10. When, put to notice, the police has filed the status report, disclosing therein, that on 30.04.2025, IO/ASI Rajesh Kumar, Police Station, Nagrota Bagwan, along with other police officials had left the Police Station, for patrolling duty and picketing duty in official vehicle. At about 6:30 AM, they had picketing at place known as Malan Chowk, near under construction flyover and were checking the vehicles there. In the meanwhile, they noticed a vehicle, being driven by its driver from Nagrota side, which was signalled to stop by ASI Rajesh Kumar. The driver of the said vehicle stopped the vehicle, on the left side of the road. The registration number of the said vehicle was found to be PB46AD-6218 and on the front side, number plate of the said vehicle, the following words were found to be printed; 4. . ( 2025:HHC:24307 ) “Senior Vice President Punjab Anti Corruption Society Regd. Punjab”. 10.1 Apart from the driver, another person was found sitting in the vehicle. Thereafter, IO demanded the requisite papers of the vehicle, upon which, the driver and his companion got perplexed. Hence, IO, developed a suspicion that some objectionable item could be there in the vehicle. As such, he has associated Sunil Kumar son of Jagdish Chand, Pradhan, Gram Panchayat, Malan and Sukhdev son of Tulsi Ram, Ward Panch, Ward No.5, Gram Panchayat, Malan, as independent witnesses, after apprising them the factual position. 10.2. Thereafter the name and address of the driver was ascertained, who disclosed his name as Prince Pal Singh son of Hardeep Singh, Street No.4, Fatechak, Tehsil and District Tarn Taran, (Punjab), whereas the other person disclosed his name as Harnoor Tuli son of Pawan Deep Tuli, Ward No.18, House No.11/16, Street Doctor Parmatma Singh Wali, Mohalla Jasewala, Tehsil and District Tarn Taran (Punjab). 10.3 Thereafter, the vehicle was searched, under the cover of the gear liver, a transparent polythene envelope was found, which was found containing another polythene envelope, having a brown coloured substance, which, on drug detection kit 5. . ( 2025:HHC:24307 ) was found to be heroin/chitta. On weighment, the said chitta was found to be 22 grams. Other codal formalities were completed and after the registration of FIR, above two persons were arrested. They were remanded to police custody. 10.4 During investigation, accused Harnoor Tuli and Prince Pal Singh, disclosed that they had purchased the chitta from Ravi alias Rohit Arora(applicant), who is working as a vehicle electrician at Tarn Taran (Punjab), on 29.04.2025, for a sum of Rs. 35,000/- out of which, Rs.15,000/- was paid in cash and Rs.20,000/- was transferred through Google Pay in the account of Ravi alias Rohit Arora(applicant). 10.5. Consequently, Ravi alias Rohit Arora(applicant) was associated in the investigation and was arrested. After receiving the positive report, the police has prepared the charge sheet and submitted in the competent Court of law. 11. On the basis of the above facts, a prayer has been made to dismiss the application. 12. The contraband allegedly recovered, in the present case, does not fall within the definition of commercial quantity. As such, rigors of Section 37 of NDPS Act, are not applicable, in the present case. 6. . ( 2025:HHC:24307 ) 13. The applicant is presumed to be innocent, as except the present case, no other case has been found to be registered against him. 14. Investigation, in the present case, is complete, as the police has already filed the charge sheet in the competent Court of law. 15. Moreover, the chances of commencement and conclusion of trial against the applicant, in near future, are not so bright. As such, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the applicant in the judicial custody, that too, for the indefinite period. 16. So far as the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for the applicant, qua the fact that the involvement of the applicant has been stated to be found, on the basis of the alleged disclosure, made by the co-accused, which according to learned counsel is not admissible in law, is concerned, that fact will be considered at the time of final decision of the case. However, considering the fact that presently the applicant is in judicial custody, this Court is of the view that dismissal of the application would be nothing, but, pre-trial punishment, which is prohibited under the law. 7. . ( 2025:HHC:24307 ) 17. So far as the apprehension of the learned Additional Advocate General, qua the fact that the applicant is resident of another State is concerned, for that apprehension, reasonable conditions, can be imposed, in case, the applicant is ordered to be released on bail, during the pendency of the trial. 18. Considering all these facts, this Court is of the view that the bail application is liable to be allowed and is accordingly allowed. 19. Consequently, the applicant is ordered to be released on bail, in case FIR No.60 of 2025, dated 30.04.2025, registered under Sections 21 & 29 of the NDPS Act, with Police Station, Nagrota Bagwan, District Kangra, 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. 20. This order, however, shall be subject to the following conditions:- a) The applicant shall regularly 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 the appropriate application; b) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence nor hamper the investigation of the case in any manner whatsoever; c) The applicant shall not make any inducement, threat or promises to any person acquainted with the facts of the 8. . ( 2025:HHC:24307 ) case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or the Police Officer; and d) The applicant shall not leave the territory of India without the prior permission of the Court. 21. 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. 22. It is made clear that respondent-State is at liberty to move an appropriate application, in case, any of the bail conditions is found violated by the applicant. 23. The Registry is directed to forward a soft copy of the bail order to the Superintendent of Jail, Lala Lajpat Rai Open Air Jail & Correctional Home, Dharamshala, District Kangra, H.P., through e-mail, with a direction to enter the date of grant of bail in the eprison software. 24. In case, the applicant is not released within a period of seven days from the date of grant of bail, the Superintendent of Jail, Lala Lajpat Rai Open Air Jail & Correctional Home, Dharamshala, District Kangra, H.P., is directed to inform this fact to the Secretary, DLSA, Kangra, District Kangra, H.P. The Superintendent of Jail, Lala Lajpat Rai Open Air Jail & Correctional Home, Dharamshala, District Kangra, H.P, 9. . ( 2025:HHC:24307 ) Himachal Pradesh, 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 25, 2025 (subhash) Digitally signed by VIKRANT CHANDEL Date: 2025.07.25 17:36:06 IST