Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 23324 (HP)

SONU v. STATE OF HP

CRMPM/2031/2025 · 2025-09-09

Virender Singh

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2025:HHC:30666 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr.MPs(M) No.  : 1984, 2030 & 2031 of 2025 Reserved on : 04.09.2025 Decided on    : 09.09.2025 CrMP(M) No. 1984 of 2025 Mohit Kumar …Applicant Versus State of Himachal Pradesh …Respondent CrMP(M) No. 2030 of 2025 Pradeep Kumar …Applicant Versus State of Himachal Pradesh …Respondent CrMP(M) No. 2031 of 2025 Sonu …Applicant Versus State of Himachal Pradesh …Respondent Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 _______________________________________________________________ For the applicants     : Mr.Balram   Sharma,   Senior Advocate,   with   Mr.Jyotirmay Bhatt, Advocate. 1 Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. 2 2025:HHC:30666 For the respondent     : Mr.Tejasvi Sharma & Mr.H.S. Rawat,   Additional   Advocates General with Mr.Rohit Sharma &   Ms.   Ranjna   Patial,   Deputy Advocates General, assisted by HC   Jaivanti   No.   81,   Police Station Sadar Solan, H.P. Virender Singh, Judge The   above­titled   bail   applications   are   being disposed of by the common order, as the applicants have preferred   these   applications,   under   Section   483  of   the Bharatiya   Nagarik   Suraksha   Sanhita,   2023   (hereinafter referred to as ‘BNSS’), for releasing them on bail, during the pendency of the trial, arising out of FIR No. 76/2025, dated 02.04.2025, registered under Sections 21 & 29 of Narcotics   Drugs   and   Psychotropic   Substances   Act (hereinafter referred to as “the ND&PS Act”), with  Police Station Sadar Solan, District Solan, H.P. 2. According to the applicants, applicant Pradeep Kumar  and  Mohit  Kumar  were  arrested  on 02.04.2025, whereas applicant Sonu was arrested on 30.04.2025, in the above noted FIR. 3. According to the applicants, they are innocent persons and have falsely been implicated, in the present case.   No recovery of any contraband was effected from 3 2025:HHC:30666 them.   They have termed the case of the prosecution as false. 4. According   to   the   applicants,   the   alleged recovered contraband does not fall within the definition of commercial   quantity,   as   such   rigors   of   Section   37   of ND&PS Act are not applicable, in this case. 5. The investigation of the present case is stated to be   completed   and   applicants   have   stated   that   they   are ready to abide by the terms and conditions to be imposed by this Court, in case, they are ordered to be released on bail, during the pendency of the trial. 6. Applicant Mohit Kumar has tried his luck by filing similar bail application before the Court of learned Special Judge, Solan, however, the said application was dismissed, on 11.06.2025. 7. On the basis of the above facts, Mr.  Balram Sharma,   Senior   Advocate,   with   Mr.   Jyotirmay   Bhatt, learned Counsel appearing for the applicants, has prayed that the present applications may kindly be allowed. 8. When   put   to   notice,   the   police   has   filed   the status report, disclosing therein, that on  02.04.2025, HC Virender No. 60, I.O. Police Station Sadar Solan, alongwith 4 2025:HHC:30666 police officials, was on patrolling duty to detect the crime, relating to excise and when, he along with the other police officials,   while   on   patrolling,   reached   at   Dohari   Deewar Saproon, then, HC Shubham Thakur No. 80, along with his team, also met them. 8.1 At about 6:30 pm, HC Virender Kumar received a   secret   information   regarding   the   fact   that   from KFC/MOCHA side, two young men, namely Pradeep and Mohit   were   coming   on   foot. Pradeep   had   worn   police uniform and having a rucksack bag on his back, whereas Mohit had worn white half sleeved shirt and blue pants. As per the information, both of them, in connivance with each   other,   came   from   another   State,   along   with Chitta/heroin and are about to sell the same in Solan city. 8.2 As   per   the   information,   if   both   the   accused persons   are   caught   and   searched,   huge   quantity   of chitta/heroin can be recovered. The said information was found to be credible and reliable. As per the I.O., in case he   would   have   obtained   authorization   letter   or   search warrants, in that eventuality, chances were there that the contraband could be removed and said two  young  men may flee away. As such, Section 42(2) of ND&PS Act was 5 2025:HHC:30666 complied with and report was sent to Supervisory Officer, Solan. 8.3 Thereafter, the I.O. apprised the police officials about the information and they had started searching for the above two young men towards KFC/Mocha bifurcation. When   they   reached   at   Saproon   Chowk,   underneath   the bridge, on fourlane bypass, then they noticed two young men. Thereafter, I.O. had given his identification and the identification of the police team to them and also apprised them about the secret information. 8.4 At that time, two persons, who were crossing from   there,   were   requested   to   associate   in   the investigation, upon which, both of them had agreed to do so. On inquiry, said persons disclosed their names as Bhupendra   Jaggi   and   Sanjay   Kumar   Sahni. In   the presence of said two persons, the names and addresses of the persons, so nabbed, were inquired. The person, who had   worn   the   police   dress   and   having   a   rucksack, disclosed his name as Pradeep Kumar son of Sh. Mange Ram (applicant in Cr. MP(M) No. 2020 of 2025), whereas the other person disclosed his name as Mohit son of Sh. Sushil Kumar (applicant in Cr.MP(M) No. 1984 of 2025). 6 2025:HHC:30666 Both the said persons were found to be resident of District Kaithal, Haryana. 8.5 Thereafter,   the   rucksack   was   searched   and during search of the rucksack, a black coloured polythene envelope, alongwith an electronic weighing machine, was found. On opening the said polythene envelope, the same was   found   containing   white   coloured   powdered   and granular shaped substance, which, on checking on drug detection   kit,   was   found   to   be   chitta/heroin   and   on weighing,   it   was   found   to   be   157   grams. Other   codol formalities were completed. Thereafter, FIR was registered and both the accused persons were arrested. 8.6 Subsequently on 03.04.2025, the case property was   produced   before   the   Court   for   conducting   the inventory proceedings under Section 52­A of ND&PS Act and accused persons were produced before the Court and they were remanded for five days police custody. 8.7 Applicant Pradeep was found to be working as Head Constable in Haryana police and under the garb of dress, he had come to sell chitta in uniform. His uniform was also taken into possession. 7 2025:HHC:30666 8.8 During   investigation,   it   was   found   that   on 01.04.2025, accused­applicants Pradeep Kumar and Mohit came to Shimla in Sonu’s car bearing No. HR83A­5896. They had stayed in a hotel at Shimla on 02.04.2025. After hiring a vehicle from Shimla, they had gone to Narkanda, however, they could not get the suitable rate, as such, they had not sold the same and came back. 8.9 Thereafter,   Pradeep   and   Mohit   had   gone   to Solan to sell the chitta and were nabbed, whereas accused Sonu (applicant in Cr.MP(M) No. 2031 of 2025) fled away from   the   spot,   alongwith   his   car,   upon   which,   accused Mohit   had   identified   hotel   Ganga,   The   Mall   Shimla   on 04.04.2025, where the entry form, photocopy of identify card   of   applicant   Pradeep   Kumar   and   CCTV   footage   of accused­applicants Pradeep, Mohit and Sonu was taken into possession. Efforts were made to nab applicant­Sonu, but, he was found to be underground. 8.10 The positive report has been received from SFSL Junga. 8.11 On 28.04.2025, a special team was constituted under the leadership of SI Gopal Singh, who had nabbed 8 2025:HHC:30666 Sonu and he was brought to Police Station and he was arrested. 8.12 During police remand, he has also made the confessional   statement,   disclosing   therein,   that   on 02.04.2025,   he   has   parked   his   vehicle   on   bypass   road Solan and can get the same recovered, upon which, he had got recovered  the  vehicle  No.  HR83A­5896,  Tata  Nexon, which was also taken into possession. 8.13 During investigation, according to the police, it was   found   that   accused   persons   purchased   157   grams Chitta from one Nigerien Bravo at Delhi for Rs. 2,80,000/­ on 27.03.2025. Thereafter efforts were made to call said Nigerien  through   applicant   Sonu,  but   his  mobile  phone was found to be switched off. 8.14 On the basis of CCTV footage, it has also been found that all the three persons had stayed in Hotel Ganga at Shimla. Applicants Mohit and Pradeep are confined in District Jail Solan, whereas, applicant Sonu is confined in Model Central Jail Nahan. 8.15 So far as the criminal history of the applicants is concerned, as per the status report, applicant Sonu is having the following case registered against him:­ 9 2025:HHC:30666 1. FIR No. 360/2023, dated 03.11.2023, under Sections 21 ND&PS Act, with  Police Station Kalayat,   Haryana   and   the   case   is   under consideration; and 2. FIR No. 128/2025, dated 18.05.2025, under Sections   25(1B)(a)   of   Arms   Act,   with   Police Station Kaithal, Haryana. 9. No   case   was   found   to   be   registered   against applicants Pradeep and Mohit. 10. On the basis of above facts, a prayer has been made to dismiss the applications. 11. The   contraband,   allegedly   recovered   in   the present case, is 157 grams chitta, which admittedly does not fall, within the definition of ‘commercial quantity’. As such, the rigors of Section 37 of the ND&PS Act are not applicable, in this case. 12. The   investigation,   in   the   present   case,   is complete,   as,   the   police   has   taken   the   stand   that   the charge­sheet has been filed in the competent Court of Law and case is now listed on 18.09.2025, for consideration on charge, before the learned Special Judge­II Solan, District Solan, H.P. From the said fact, it can be said that chances of commencement and conclusion of the trial, against the applicants, in near future, are not so bright. 10 2025:HHC:30666 13. Moreover,   pre­trial   punishment   is   prohibited under the law. The punishment also cannot be inflicted before the conclusion of the trial. 14. At the time of deciding the bail applications, detailed discussion about the merits of the case should be avoided, as the same should cause prejudice to the case of the prosecution as well as the case of the accused persons. 15. While deciding the bail applications, the main focus of the Court should be on the seriousness of the offences,   availability   of   the   applicant(s)   for   trial   and apprehensions, if any, expressed by the police. Although, in the status report, no apprehension has been expressed by   the   police,   but   it   has   been   argued   by   the   learned Additional   Advocate   General,   that   applicant   Pradeep Kumar is a police official and allegedly had caught with contraband and in case he is ordered to be released on bail,   he   may   coerce   the   witnesses. Similarly,   criminal history   of   applicant   Sonu   has   also   been   highlighted   to decline the relief to him. 16. In   the   given   facts   and   circumstances   of   the case,   this   Court   is   of   the   view   that   the   above apprehensions are too short  to decline the relief to the 11 2025:HHC:30666 applicants, as applicants Pradeep Kumar and Mohit are in custody,   since   03.04.2025   and   accused   Sonu   has   been arrested, in this case, on 30.04.2025. This Court is of the view that no useful purpose would be served by keeping the  applicants  in the  judicial  custody,  that   too,  for  the indefinite period. 17. So far as, the arguments of learned Additional Advocate   General,   qua   the   fact   that   the   applicants   are resident of adjoining State i.e. Haryana, and may not be available for the trial, in case, ordered to be released on bail  are   concerned,  for   those  apprehensions,  reasonable conditions can be imposed upon the applicants, in case, they   are   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   present   bail   applications   are   liable   to   be allowed and are accordingly allowed. 19. Consequently, the applicants are ordered to be released,   on   bail,   in   case   FIR  No.   76/2025,   dated 02.04.2025,   registered   with   Police   Station   Sadar   Solan, District Solan, H.P., under Sections 21 and 29 of the NDPS Act, on their furnishing personal bonds in the sum of Rs. 12 2025:HHC:30666 1,00,000/­ each, with two sureties each, of the like amount each,   to   the   satisfaction   of   the   learned   trial   Court. However,   this   order   shall   be   subject   to   the   following conditions:­ a)  The applicants 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   applicants   shall   not   tamper   with   the prosecution evidence nor hamper the investigation of the case in any manner whatsoever; c) The applicants 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) The applicants shall not leave the territory of India without the prior permission of the Court. 20. 20. 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. 21. 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   any   of   the applicants. 13 2025:HHC:30666 22. The Registry is directed to forward a soft copy of the bail order to the Superintendents of Jail, District Jail Solan, H.P. and Model Central Jail, Nahan, H.P. through e­ mail, with a direction to enter the date of grant of bail in the e­prison software. 23. In case, the applicants are not released within a period of seven days from the date of grant of bail, the Superintendents of Jail, District Jail Solan, H.P. and Model Central Jail Nahan, H.P., are directed to inform this fact to the Secretary, DLSA, Solan. The Superintendents of Jail, District Jail Solan, H.P. and Model Central  Jail  Nahan, H.P.,   are   further   directed   that   if   the   applicants   fail   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) 09th September, 2025 Judge (Pramod Kumar) RAJNI Digitally signed by RAJNI Date: 2025.09.09 10:49:20 +0530