1 2026:HHC:12748 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr. MP (M) No. :  3056   of 2025 Reserved on :    16 th   April, 2026 Decided on : 22 nd   April, 2026 Mohammad Faizan …Applicant Versus State of Himachal Pradesh …Respondent Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh,  Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the applicant      :  Mr. Rajiv   Rai   &   Mr. Mukesh Sharma, Advocates. For the respondent   : Mr. Mohinder Zharaick and Mr. H.S. Rawat, Additional Advocates General assisted   by   HC   Sandeep   Singh No.512, Police Station Paonta Sahib. Virender Singh, Judge Applicant­Mohammad   Faizan,   has   filed   the present application, under Section  483  of the  Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita  (hereinafter referred to as the 'BNSS'), seeking the relief of bail, during the pendency of the trial, arising out of FIR No.108/2025, dated 11th May, 2025,  registered   with  Police   Station,  Paonta   Sahib, District Sirmaur, H.P., under Sections 21, 22 and 29 of 1 Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. 2 2026:HHC:12748 the Narcotic Drugs and  Psychotropic Substances Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘NDPS Act’). 2. According   to   the   applicant,   he   is   innocent person and has falsely been implicated, in this case, by the police, on the basis of statement of co­accused, which is not admissible. 3. As per the applicant, he has no previous FIR of such   nature   and   there   is   no   evidence   to   connect   the applicant with the crime in question. 4. It is the further case of the applicant that he has spent a significant time in custody and the trial is not likely to conclude in the near future. 5. According   to   the   applicant   he   has   already suffered   incarceration   for   a   considerable   period   and continued custody would amount to pre­trial punishment, which is impermissible in law. 6. According to the applicant, no recovery is to be made from him and his continued custody serves no useful purpose. 7. The   applicant,   earlier   has   tried   his   luck,   by moving   similar   application,   before   the   Court   of   learned 3 2026:HHC:12748 Special   Judge­II,   Nahan,   District   Sirmaur,   however,   the said application was dismissed on 03.12.2025. 8. As   per   the   applicant,   investigation,   in   the present case, is complete and no useful purpose would be served by keeping him, in the judicial custody. 9. Elaborating the principle that ‘bail is the rule and jail is an exception’, the applicant has pleaded that he has no role to play in the crime in question. 10. The co­accused of the applicant is also stated to have already been released on bail, as such, the applicant has sought the relief of bail on the ground of parity also. 11. Apart from this, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of 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. 12. On the basis of the above facts, a prayer has been made to allow the application. 13. When put to notice, police has filed the status report,   disclosing   therein,   that   on   11.05.2025,   HC   Anil Kumar,  No.645, along with other  police official, was on 4 2026:HHC:12748 patrolling   duty   to   detect   the   crime   relating   to   excise, narcotics and gambling Act, in the area of Sub­Division Paonta Sahib. 13.1. At about 01.15 p.m., when, the police party was present   at   Batamandi,   then,   the   I.O.,   received   a   secret information  that  one Bilal Khan son of Yakub Ali, along with   a   boy,   namely   ABC,   is   coming   on   his   motorcycle bearing   Registration   No.HP17F­0877,   with   drugs   and smack with them from Uttar Pradesh to Paonta Sahib. As per the information, in case, he is nabbed, large quantity of contraband could be recovered. 13.2. According to the I.O., in case, he obtains the search warrants and authorization letter, delay could be caused and contraband could be removed from there. 13.3. The information was found to be authentic and reliable, as such, the I.O. has complied with the provisions of Section 42(2) of the NDPS Act and submitted the same to his superior officer. 13.4. Thereafter,   the   I.O.,   along   with   other   police officials,   proceeded   towards   the   check   post   to   put picketing, at about 2.10 p.m., where the police party was 5 2026:HHC:12748 present   at   a   distance   of   200   metrs,   towards   Haryana boundry from Beharal Check post, for picketing, then he stopped 4­5 vehicles and requested the persons to be the independent witnesses, but no one was ready to be the independent witness. 13.5. At   about   3.10   p.m.,   the   I.O.,   noticed,   two persons coming on foot, towards Beharal check post and he   stopped   them   and   inquired   about   their   names. On inquiry, they disclosed their names as Pradeep Kumar and Ashish Sharma. The I.O., apprised them about the secret information   and   they   were   associated   as   independent witnesses. Thereafter,  picketing was done. 13.6. At   about   4.20   p.m.,   a   motorcycle   Bullet No.HP17F­0877, as per the secret information, came there from Haryana side. Two persons were found on the said motorcycle. Before reaching the point, where picketing had been done, the person, who was pillion rider, was made to alight down, along with bag and he turned his motorcycle towards Haryana and fled away from there. 13.7. With the help of the police officials, the pillion rider, who was made to alight down from the motorcycle, 6 2026:HHC:12748 along   with   bag,   was   nabbed. Thereafter,   the   I.O.,   has shown   his   identify   card   to   him   and   inquired   from   him about the name and address. The said person disclosed his name as ABC. The name of other person, who fled away, along with motorcycle, was ascertained. His name was found to be Bilal Khan, as per the person/CCL, who was nabbed. 13.8. Thereafter, rucksack, which ABC was having, was checked. On opening, it was found containing black coloured polythene envelope, which was further found to be  containing   20   strips   of   capsules   marka   PROXIOHM­ SPAS. Each strip was found containing 24 capsules, upon which, the prohibited salt Tramadol, was printed. Total 480 capsules were found. Out of total 20 strips, 5 strips were of the Batch No.RHC460/24 and 15 strips were of Batch No.RHC461/24, manufacturing date of which was found ­2/2025 and expiry date 01/2027. 13.9. All   the   480   capsules   were   found   to   be manufactured by Reswin Health Care, Plot No.41 Gabriel Road   Sector­2,   Parwanoo,   H.P.     thereafter,   the   I.O. demanded   the   license/prescription   slips   from   the   CCL, 7 2026:HHC:12748 which he could not produced, upon which, all the 20 strips were again  put  in the black coloured envelope and the same was put in the same rucksack. The rucksack was sealed with seal having impression ‘D’. 13.10. Thereafter, the small transparent polythene bag was checked, which was found containing pink coloured substance, which, on the basis of experience, was found to be smack/heroin and weight of the same was found to be 08   grams. The   said   contraband   was   also   taken   into possession. 13.11. Other   codal   formalities   were   completed. Thereafter, the CCL was inquired, who has disclosed that Bilal   Khan   had   gone   with   him   to   Mirzapur   Behat   to procure   these   capsules   and   smack. He   has   paid   50% amount for purchasing the same. 13.12. Thereafter, the rukka was prepared and on the basis of said rukka, FIR in question was registered. 14. Subsequently, the statements of witnesses were recorded,   under   Section   180   of   BNS. The   CCL   has disclosed his age as 21 years, as such, he was arrested on 11.05.2025,   at   10.05   p.m.     He   was   medico­legally 8 2026:HHC:12748 examined at Civil Hospital, Paonta Sahib. Thereafter, on 12.05.2025, the CCL was produced before the Court, from where, he was remanded to police custody till 15.05.2025. 15. During investigation, on 14.05.2025, the age of the CCL was found less than 18 years, as such, he was produced before the Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board,  Nahan,  from  where,   he  was   sent  to  correctional home. 16. The   positive   result   has   been   received   from SFSL,   Junga,   where   the   contraband   has   been   sent   for analysis. 17. On   07.08.2025,   accused   Bilal   Khan   was arrested at 5.20 p.m.  The motorcycle used by him, in the crime,   in   question,   bearing   registration   No.HP17F­0877, was  also taken into possession. He was medico­legally examined. He was produced before the learned Judicial Magistrate   First   Class,   Court   No.2,   Paonta   Sahib,   from where, he was remanded to Police custody. 18. During investigation, Bilal Khan, disclosed that he has purchased the prohibited capsules, for a sum of Rs.4500/­, from the shop of a chemist at Mirzapur Uttar 9 2026:HHC:12748 Pradesh and he could identify the same, upon which, on 09.08.2025, accused Bilal Khan had identified the medical shop in village Jattowala. The I.O., in the presence of C. Manoj Kumar No.2287, Police Station Mirzapur, U.P and Pradhan   Gram   Panchayat,   Satish   Kumar   of   village Jattowala, inquired about the name of the person present there. The person present there has disclosed his name as Abdul Basit. 19. Thereafter, the I.O., after completing other codal formalities, searched the shop. During search of the shop, below the counter, a box, on which PROXIOHM­ SPAS, has been printed, was found. A strip was also found, upon which PROXIOHM­ SPAS was found printed, out of which two capsules have been taken away. Behind the chair, in the rack, a box was found, upon which PROXIOHM­ SPAS was found printed. Each box was found containing 10 strips and each strip was found containing 24 capsules. Out of one strip, two capsules were taken out. Total 21 strips,   containing   502   capsules,   were   recovered,   which were found containing prohibited salt Tramadol. Out of total 21 strips, 11 strips (including 1 strip, out of which 10 2026:HHC:12748 two capsules were taken out), were found to be of Batch No.MC­784 and 10 strips of Batch No.RHC­030/25. 20. Out of total 502 capsules, one box containing 240 capsules, and one strip, containing 22 capsules, out of which, two capsules have been taken out, was found to be manufactured   by   Maxilla   Medisciences   Private   Limited, Plot No.14, 15, 16 Express Industrial Park Gomed Near Pirana   Gate   Circle   S.P.   Ring   Road   Pirana   Ahmadabad Gujrat and other box containing 240 capsules of prohibited drugs were found to be manufactured by Reswin Health Care Plot No.41, Sector­2, Parwanoo. 21. Accused   Abdul   Basit,   could   not   produce   any record qua those prohibited capsules. Consequently, the contraband was taken into possession. After complying with all the codal formalities, accused Abdul Basit, was arrested on 09.08.2025, at 4.40 p.m.. On 10.08.2025, he was   produced   before   the   Court   of   learned   Judicial Magistrate   First   Class,   Court   No.2,   Paonta   Sahib,   from where, he was remanded to police custody till 12.08.2025. 22. During   investigation,   accused   Abdul   Basit, disclosed that he is working as assistant in the shop owned 11 2026:HHC:12748 by Dr./Chemist Mohd. Faizan (applicant), for the last 2­3 months. On 11.05.2025, he was present at Riza Medical Store, as, accused Bilal Khan has disclosed that at the direction of doctor, Abdul Vasit has handed over envelope containing  the  capsules’  box  to  doctor. Thereafter,  the owner/doctor has handed over the above envelope to Bilal Khan and the CCL, for a sum of Rs.4500/­. Abdul Basit, also disclosed that they also sold the capsules in their shop and the doctor used to sell the same at the rate of Rs.10/­ per capsules. Doctor used to pay him Rs.150/­ ­Rs.200/­ daily. 23. The contraband, so recovered, was taken into possession   and   was   sent   to   SFSL   Junga,   from   where, positive report has been received. 24. On   05.10.2025,   on   the   basis   of   secret information Mohd. Faizan (applicant), was also arrested. During investigation, the elder brother of applicant Mohd. Faizan, produced the original affidavit qua rent deed and photocopy   of   license   issued   in   favour   of   Mohd. Faizan, which were taken into possession. However, no bill/record 12 2026:HHC:12748 qua   purchase   of   recovered   prohibited   capsules   was produced. 25. Lastly,   it   has   been   pleaded   that   the investigation,   in   the   present   case   is   complete   and   the charge sheet has been filed. The case is now listed for PWs on   23.04.2026. No   other   case   is   found   to   have   been registered against the applicant. 26. On the basis of the above facts, a prayer has been made to dismiss the application. 27. In this case, it has vehemently been argued by the learned counsel appearing for the applicant that when the police allegedly searched the shop, the applicant was neither associated, nor, the provisions of Section 100(4) of Cr.PC/Section 103(4) of BNSS, were complied with by the I.O. 28. In addition to this, it has also been argued that the   alleged   involvement   of   the   applicant   was   allegedly found by the police on the basis of the alleged disclosure made by Abdul Basit, which is not admissible in evidence, as, the same cannot be taken into consideration to connect the applicant with the crime in question. Situation would 13 2026:HHC:12748 have been otherwise, had the involvement of the applicant been   only   based   upon   the   alleged   revelation/disclosure made by accused Abdul Basit, however, according to the police, the shop from which the contraband was recovered, was in the name of applicant   and accused Abdul Basit was working there as part time servant. 29. During   the   investigation,   the   police   has   also taken into possession the affidavit, rent deed of the shop in question, along with the authorization licence, in favour of the   applicant,   for   renting   the   shop. As   per   those documents, the shop, in question was taken on rent by applicant Mohammad Faizan from Omi son of Suresh, for a period of three years from 01.07.2024 to 30.06.2027. 30. In addition to this, the police has also taken into possession copy of the licence, which is valid upto 21.07.2027,   authorizing   the   holder,   i.e.,   Mohammad Faizan  (applicant) to sell the stock or exhibit for sale or distribute   by   retail   drugs   other   than   those   specified   in Schedules C, C(1) and X of the drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945, in Village Jatowala near by Bus Stand Mirzapur, Saharanpur, Utter Pradesh. 14 2026:HHC:12748 31. The   contraband   was   recovered   from   the   said shop of the applicant, although, in the presence of Abdul Basit,   who   is   working   as   part   time   salesman. Merely, because the applicant was not found present there, does not   absolve   him   from   the   liability   of   keeping   the contraband in his shop, which is in his exclusive control. 32. The  applicant, in the present case, has been arrested,   under   the   provisions   of   NDPS   Act. The legislature, in its wisdom, has enacted this statute to curb the   menace   of   drug   abuse   with   stringent   punishment. Certain conditions are there, in the NDPS Act, in the shape of Section 37 of NDPS Act, which are, in addition to the conditions,   as   contained   in   Section  483   of   the   BNSS. Before   releasing   a   person   on   bail,   those   conditions,   as enumerated under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, are to be fulfilled, if the accused has been arrested for the offence, involving commercial quantity of contraband. 33. The   contraband   allegedly   recovered   from   the applicant,   admittedly,   falls   within   the   definition   of ‘commercial quantity’. Once, it has been held that the contraband allegedly recovered from the possession of the 15 2026:HHC:12748 accused   (applicant)   falls   in   the   category   of   ‘commercial quantity’,   as   per   the   Notification   issued   by   the   Central Government, then, the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act come into play. 34. The   Hon’ble   Supreme   Court   in  Criminal Appeal No. 5544 of 2024,  titled as  ‘Narcotics Control Bureau versus Kashif’, reported in (2024) 11 Supreme Court   Cases   372,   has   again   reiterated   the   law,   as enumerated by it, in  Narcotics Control Bureau versus Mohit   Aggarwal,  reported   in  AIR   2022   SC   3444,   by holding that the provisions of Section 37 of NDPS Act are mandatory in nature. Relevant paragraphs 8 and 39 of the said judgment are reproduced, as under: “8. There has been consistent and persistent view of this Court that in the NDPS cases,  where the offence is punishable with minimum sentence of ten years, the accused shall generally be not released on bail. Negation of bail is the rule and its grant is an exception. While considering the application for bail, the court has to bear in mind the provisions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, which are mandatory in nature. The recording of finding as mandated in Section 37 is a sine qua non for granting bail to the accused involved in the offences under the said Act. Apart from the granting opportunity of hearing to the Public Prosecutor, the other two conditions i.e., (i)   the   satisfaction   of   the   court   that   there   are reasonable grounds for believing that the accused is not guilty of the alleged offence and that (ii) he is 16 2026:HHC:12748 not likely to commit any offence while on bail, are the cumulative and not alternative conditions. xxx xxx xxx 39. The  upshot   of   the  above   discussion   may   be summarized as under: (i)  The provisions of NDPS Act are required to be interpreted keeping in mind the scheme, object and purpose of the Act; as also the impact on the society as a whole. It has to be interpreted literally and not liberally, which may ultimately frustrate the object, purpose and Preamble of the Act. (ii)  While considering the application for bail, the Court must bear in mind the provisions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act which are mandatory in nature. Recording of findings as mandated in Section 37 is sine   qua   non   is   known   for   granting   bail   to   the accused involved in the offences under the NDPS Act. (iii)  The purpose of insertion of Section 52A laying down the procedure for disposal of seized Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances, was to ensure the early disposal of the seized contraband drugs and substances. It was inserted in 1989 as one of the measures to implement and to give effect to the International   Conventions   on   the   Narcotic   drugs and psychotropic substances. (iv) Sub­section (2) of Section 52A lays down the procedure   as   contemplated   in   sub­section   (1) thereof,   and   any   lapse   or   delayed   compliance thereof would be merely a procedural irregularity which   would   neither   entitle   the   accused   to   be released on bail nor would vitiate the trial on that ground alone. (v) Any procedural irregularity or illegality found to have been committed in conducting the search and seizure   during   the   course   of   investigation   or thereafter,   would   by   itself   not   make   the   entire evidence   collected   during   the   course   of investigation, inadmissible. The Court would have to   consider   all   the   circumstances   and   find   out 17 2026:HHC:12748 whether any serious prejudice has been caused to the accused. (vi) Any lapse or delay in compliance of Section 52A by itself would neither vitiate the trial nor would entitle the accused to be released on bail. The Court will have to consider other circumstances and the other primary evidence collected during the course of investigation, as also the statutory presumption permissible under Section 54 of the NDPS Act.” (self­emphasis supplied) 35. In   view   of   the   law   laid   down   by   Hon’ble Supreme Court in  Kashif’s case (supra),  before releasing the person, involved in the crime, it is obligatory upon the Court to record the findings, which should be more than prima­facie  findings,   regarding   existence   of   the   twin conditions, as enumerated under Section  37(b)(ii)  of the NDPS   Act. In   other   words,   it   can   be   said   that   before releasing   the   person,   involved   in   the   crime   in   issue, findings have to be recorded by the Court, about the fact that accused is not guilty of such offence, and while on bail, he is not likely to commit any offence. 36. Considering all these facts, this Court is of the view that the applicant is not able to make out a case, on the basis of which, it can be said that the applicant is not guilty  of such offence and in case, he is ordered to be 18 2026:HHC:12748 released, on bail, he is not likely to commit any offence. As such,   in   the   absence   of   the   satisfaction   of   the   twin conditions, the applicant is not held entitled for any relief, under Section  483 of the BNSS. Consequently, the bail application is dismissed. 37. Any   of   the   observations,   made   herein   above, 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. Record be sent back to the quarter concerned. ( Virender Singh ) April 22, 2026 ( ps ) Judge