Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
2025:HHC:27870 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr.MP(M) No.1921 of 2025 Reserved on :
14 .08.2025 Decided on :
19 .08.2025 Prakash Chand …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. Kiran Dhiman, Advocate. For the respondent : Mr. Varun Chandel and Mr. H.S. Rawat,
Additional
Advocates General assisted by HC Narotam Ram, No.11, Police Station BSL Colony
Sundernagar,
District Mandi, 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’), applicantPrakash Chand has sought his release, on bail, during the pendency of the trial, arising out of FIR No.44 of 2025, dated 11.04.2025, registered under Section 18 of the 1Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. 2 2025:HHC:27870
Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘NDPS Act’), with Police Station BSL Colony Sundernagar, District Mandi, H.P.
2. According to the applicant, he is innocent person and has no concern, whatsoever, with the crime, for which, he has been arrested, by the police. 3. As per the applicant, he is having a small child and no one is there to look after him except his wife, who is not able to make both ends meet. 4. It is the further case of the applicant that the story of the prosecution is false. The contraband, i.e., 210 plants of opium were allegedly found cultivated over the land, which, according to the applicant, is not owned by him. 5. According to the applicant, the contraband, involved, 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. 6. Applicant had earlier tried his luck by moving application, bearing Cr.MP(M) No.1602 of 2025, under
3 2025:HHC:27870
Section 482 of the BNSS, before this Court, which was dismissed vide order dated 8.7.2025. Thereafter, the applicant has also filed application, before the Court of learned Special Judge, Sundernagar, District Mandi, which was also dismissed on 31.07.2025. 7. Apart from this, Ms.
Kiran Dhiman, 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. 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 10.04.2025, HC Narotam Ram No. 111, under the leadership of SI Mahender Singh Incharge, Police Post, Nihri, District Mandi, was on patrolling duty and duty to detect the crime relating to narcotic drugs in the area. 9.1. When, the police party was present at place, known as Valag, then, at about 3.50 p.m., a secret information was received, disclosing therein, that in village
4 2025:HHC:27870
Chauri, the villagers had illegally cultivated opium plants and in case, raid is conducted, cultivation of opium plants, in large quantity, 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.
9.2. Thereafter, the police party proceeded towards Chauri (Shilh), in a private vehicle. When, they reached near Chauri Nala, then after parking the vehicle on the side of the road, reached on foot at Chauri (Shilh) at about 5.30 p.m. They noticed cultivation of opium plants in the fields below the road leading to Janothi from Chauri Nala. 9.3. 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. 9.4.
Thereafter, the application was moved before the SDPO, Sundernagar, through Whatsapp to destroy the
5 2025:HHC:27870
opium plants, upon which, SDPO Sundernagar, directed to collect the samples and remaining plants were directed to be destroyed. Thereafter, five plants, along with roots, were uprooted and separated, out of 210 plants and were put in a white coloured plastic sack. Rest of the plants were destroyed. 9.5. 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. 9.6. On 17.04.2025, revenue record was obtained, according to which, land bearing Khasra No.268, out of the area in Khasra No.28, measuring 5 Bighas, 13 Biswas, 16 Biswansi, cultivation of opium was found over the land, measuring 1 biswa, and as per the record, the said Khasra number was found to be owned by State of Himachal Pradesh, however, persons namely, Briju, Longu, Variya Bhikam, sons of Shibu, were found to be recorded, in unauthorized possession. 9.7. On 19.04.2025, a request was made to Tehsildar, Nihri to prepare the Tatima of the area. 6 2025:HHC:27870
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. 9.8. 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. 9.9. 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 and local inhabitants. 9.10. As per the demarcation, the place, where the opium was found to be cultivated, is Khasra No.28.
Thereafter, the copy of the demarcation was obtained and the statement of the Record Keeper was recorded. As per
7 2025:HHC:27870
the demarcation report, the persons namely Briju, Longu, Varia, Bhikam, were found to be recorded in unauthorized possession. Prakash Chand (applicant) was found to be in cultivating possession, on the basis of family settlement. In this regard, the statements of their family members were recorded. 9.11. It is the further case of the police that the applicant has tried his luck by filing application under Section 482 of the BNSS, however, the said application was dismissed on 8.7.2025. Thereafter, efforts were made to nab the applicant, but he was evading his arrest. However, on 10.07.2025, a secret information was received that the applicant is present in Balag market, upon which, he was nabbed from there and was arrested. 9.12. As per the status report, except the present case, no case was found to be registered against him. 9.13. It has also been pleaded in the status report that investigation, in the present case, is complete and chargesheet was prepared and submitted for scrutiny. 9.14. Lastly, it has been apprehended that in case, he is released on bail, he may not be available for the trial and
8 2025:HHC:27870
may also coerce the witnesses and may also indulge in the same activities. 10. On the basis of above facts, a prayer has been made to dismiss the application. 11. As per the status report, except the present case, no case has been found to have been registered against the applicant. As such, the presumption of innocence is still available to the applicant. 12. Admittedly, the contraband, involved 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. 13.
The bail application cannot be rejected, as a matter of punishment, as, pretrial punishment is prohibited under the law and the punishment can only be inflicted, after the conclusion of trial. 14. The investigation, in the present case, is complete, as, the police has prepared the chargesheet and is in the process to file the same in the competent Court of law. As such, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the applicant in the judicial custody, that too, for
9 2025:HHC:27870
the indefinite period, as, the chances of commencement and conclusion of trial against the applicant, in near future, are not so bright. 15. Considering all these facts, this Court is of the view that the application is liable to be allowed and is accordingly allowed. 16. Consequently, the applicant is ordered to be released on bail in case FIR No.44 of 2025, dated 11.04.2025, registered under Section 18 of the NDPS Act, with Police Station BSL Colony Sundernagar, District Mandi, H.P., on his furnishing personal bond, in the sum of 5 ₹ 0,000/, with one surety of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. 17. 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
10 2025:HHC:27870
the facts of the 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. 18.
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. 19. It is made clear that respondentState is at liberty to move an appropriate application, in case, any of the bail conditions is found violated by the applicant. 20. The Registry is directed to forward a soft copy of the bail order to the Superintendent of Jail, SubJail, Mandi, District Mandi, Himachal Pradesh, through email, with a direction to enter the date of grant of bail in the e prison software. 21. In case, the applicant is not released within a period of seven days from the date of grant of bail, the Superintendent of Jail, SubJail, Mandi, District Mandi, Himachal Pradesh, is directed to inform this fact to the Secretary, DLSA, Mandi. The Superintendent of Jail, Sub Jail, Mandi, District Mandi, Himachal Pradesh, is further
11 2025:HHC:27870
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 ) August 19, 2025 ( ps) Judge RAJNI Digitally signed by RAJNI Date: 2025.08.19 12:43:29 +0530