____________________________________________________ vs State Of H.P
2025 Latest Caselaw 1355 HP

Himachal Pradesh High Court

____________________________________________________ vs State Of H.P on 1 July, 2025

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA.

                              Cr.MP(M) No. 1199 of 2025
                                 Decided on: 01.07.2025
____________________________________________________
Bittu                                 ........... petitioner
                       Versus

State of H.P.                            ..........respondent
____________________________________________________
Coram:
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Bipin Chander Negi, Judge
Whether approved for reporting? 1

For the petitioner                     :      Mr. Sanjay Ranta, Advocate.

For the respondent                     :
                            Mr. B.N. Sharma, Additional
                            Advocate General.
____________________________________________________
Bipin Chander Negi, Judge (oral)

The present bail petition has been filed under Section 483

of the BNSS for grant of regular bail, in FIR No.73 of 2024, dated

28.04.2024, registered at Police Station, Banjar District Kullu H.P.

H.P., under Sections 20& 25 of the ND& PS Act.

2. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. Perused the

record and the status report.

3. FIR in the case at hand was registered on 28.04.2024

against the present petitioner. The bail petitioner was

apprehended while seated in a vehicle bearing No.HP-35 1512.

On search of the vehicle, Charas weighing 1 kg 463 grams was

recovered from the vehicle. The quantity recovered in the case at

hand is a commercial quantity. The bail petitioner was arrested on

28.4.2024 and presently is in judicial custody

Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

4. Challan in the case at hand was filed on 8th July,

2024. Trial is in progress. There are total 14 witnesses, two

witnesses stand examined. The case is now listed for recording of

statement of four prosecution witnesses on 28th November, 2025.

5. In the aforesaid backdrop, learned counsel appearing on

behalf of the petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court to

judgment dated 18.10.2024 passed in Special Leave to Appeal

Crl. Nos. 9737 of 2024 titled as Johnson vs. State of Rep by The

Inspector of Police, NIB-CID Police, Nib-Cid and to judgment

passed in Special Leave to Appeal Crl No. 16671/2024, decided

on 10.01.2025 titled as Shambhulal Gurjar vs. State of Rajasthan.

6. In both the aforesaid cases, the quantity of contraband

involved was commercial. The High Court had rejected the bail in

both the cases on account of commercial quantity being involved

in the cases. In the former case, the accused had been in custody

since more three years, whereas in the latter, he had undergone

one year and eight months of custody. In both the cases taking

into account, the period spent by the bail petitioner had been

enlarged on bail.

7. Other than the aforesaid, learned counsel has drawn the

attention of this Court to judgment reported as 2023 (18) 166

titled as Mohd. Muslim @ Hussain vs. State of (NCT of Delhi),

wherein it has been held that grant of bail on account of undue

delay in trial cannot be said to be fettered by Section 37 of the

ND&PS Act given the imperative of Section 436A of the Erstwhile

Code of Criminal Procedure. In the status report, no criminal

antecedents of the bail petitioner have been alleged.

8. The consequences of pre-trial incarceration are grave. A

person presumed innocent is subjected to psychological and

physical deprivations of jail. Further, a jailed individual is

prevented from contributing to the preparation of his defence. The

burden of his detention falls heavily on the innocent members of

his family.

9. Personal liberty is a very precious fundamental right. The

same is to be curtailed only when it becomes imperative,

according to the peculiar facts and circumstances of each case.

10. The object of bail is to secure the attendance of the

accused person at his trial by reasonable amount of bail. The

object of bail is neither punitive nor preventative. As per the status

report, bail petitioner is stated to be a resident of Village Narahan,

Post Office Teban, Tehsil Karsog, District Mandi, H.P. In order to

ensure his presence at trial stringent conditions can be imposed

while granting bail.

11. Nothing unfavourable has been stated in the status report

qua the social circumstances of the petitioner whereby it can be

made out that the petitioner is likely to betray the confidence, that

the Court may place in him to turn out to take justice at the hands

of the Court.

12. Hence, after going through the material available on record

and considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case,

this Court finds that the present is a fit case where judicial

discretion to admit the petitioner on bail is required to be

exercised in his favour. Accordingly, the bail application is

allowed and it is ordered that the petitioner, who has been

arrested by the police, in case FIR No.73 of 2024, dated

28.04.2024, registered at Police Station, Banjar District Kullu

H.P. under Sections 20 & 25 of the ND&PS Act shall be forthwith

released on bail, subject to his furnishing personal bond to the

tune of Rs.1,00,000/- (one lakh) with one local surety in the like

amount, to the satisfaction of learned trial Court. This bail order is

subject, however, to the following conditions:-

(i). Petitioner shall 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 appropriate application;

(ii) Petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence or hamper the investigation in any manner whatsoever;

(iii) Petitioner will not leave India without prior permission of the Court;

(iv) Petitioner shall not make any inducement, threat or promise, directly or indirectly, to the victim and Investigating Officer or any person acquainted with the facts of the case to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or any Police Officer;

(v) Petitioner shall inform the Station House Officer of the concerned police station about his place of residence during bail and trial. Any change in the same shall also be communicated within two weeks thereafter. Petitioner shall furnish details of

his Aadhar Card, Telephone Number, Email, PAN Card, Bank Account Number, if any; &

(vi) It is made clear that in case petitioner is arraigned as an accused, in future, in any FIR, then his bail is liable to be cancelled. It is open for the Investigating Agency to move appropriate application in that regard.

13. Needless to say that the Investigating agency shall be at

liberty to move this Court for cancellation of the bail, if any of the

aforesaid conditions are violated by the petitioner.

14. Be it stated that any expression of opinion given in this

order does not mean an expression of opinion on the merits of the

case and the trial Court will not be influenced by any observations

made therein.

15. The Registry is directed to forward a soft copy of the bail

order to the Superintendent, District Jail, Kullu H.P., through

email, with a direction to enter the date of grant of bail in the e-

prison software.

16. In case, the petitioner is not released within a period of

seven days from the date of grant of bail, the Superintendent,

District Jail, Kullu H.P., is directed to inform this fact to the

Secretary, DLSA, Kullu. The Superintendent, District Jail, Kullu,

District H.P, is further directed that if the petitioner fail to furnish

the bail bonds, as per the order passed by this Court, within a

period of one month from today, the said fact be submitted to this

Court.