Himachal Pradesh High Court
Reserved On : 27.05.2025 vs Narcotics Control Bureau on 30 May, 2025
2025:HHC:16777
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Cr.MP(M) No.: 710 of 2025
Reserved on : 27.05.2025
Decided on : 30.05.2025
Sukhdev Singh ....Petitioner.
Versus
Narcotics Control Bureau, Sub Zone Mandi,
District Mandi, H.P. ...Respondent.
Coram
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Satyen Vaidya, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?1 Yes
For the petitioner : Mr. Rakesh Kumar Chaudhary
Advocates.
For the respondent : Mr. Ashwani Pathak, Senior
Advocate, with Mr. Dev Raj,
Advocate.
Satyen Vaidya, Judge
Petitioner is an accused in case registered
under Sections 8, 20, 29 & 60 of the Narcotic Drugs and
Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short 'ND&PS Act')
vide Crime No.75 of 2022, dated 05.11.2022, by the
Narcotics Control Bureau (for short NCB), Sub Zone,
Mandi District Mandi H.P. Petitioner is facing trial along
1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2 2025:HHC:16777
with his co-accused before learned Special Judge, Mandi
in a case titled NCB vs. Sukhdev Singh and others (CIS
Registration No. 47/2023).
2. The allegation of the prosecution is that the
NCB had received a secret information on 04.11.2022 with
respect to petitioner along with his co-accused being
involved in trafficking of Charas and their proposed travel
on 05.11.2022 from District Kullu to Patiala (Punjab) in
white coloured car bearing registration No. PB-13-AR-7929
with huge quantity of Charas.
3. The officials of NCB with assistance of local
police of Police Station Sadar, District Mandi had allegedly
laid a Naka at Bhiuli Chowk, Mandi on 05.11.2022. The
above noted car was intercepted at about 8.00 A.M. The
petitioner was found driving the car, whereas his co-
accused Maja Ram and Harneet Kaur were found
occupying front passenger and rear seat respectively. The
car was checked/searched. Since, nothing was found from
initial search, the officials of NCB suspected the
concealment of contraband in some cavity of the vehicle.
The car was taken to a mechanic and with his help, the
3 2025:HHC:16777
Charas weighing 8.742 Kgs. was recovered from a cavity in
the vehicle.
4. It is also the case of prosecution that a few more
persons are involved in the crime, but they had
absconded. The prosecution had been launched against
the petitioner and two other accused found inside the car,
whereas, liberty has been reserved to file supplementary
challan against other accused as and when apprehended.
5. The prayer for grant of bail has been made on
the ground that despite the prolonged custody of petitioner
since 05.11.2022, the trial has not concluded.
6. The status report filed by the respondents
reveals that the petitioner is facing charge of being in
conscious possession of huge quantity of Charas weighing
08.742 Kgs. The prosecution is relying upon 11 witnesses,
out of whom, 4 have already been examined.
7. An apprehension has been expressed that in
case of release of petitioner on bail, he may abscond to
avoid the consequences of his probable conviction.
8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and
have also gone through the records of the case carefully.
4 2025:HHC:16777
9. The petitioner filed bail application Cr.MP(M)
No.1214 of 2024 before this Court. However, the said
application was later withdrawn by the petitioner on
12.07.2024. Thereafter, the petitioner filed another bail
application for grant of bail being Cr.MP(M) No.2360 of
2024, which came to be dismissed by this Court on
29.11.2024.
10. While dismissing the earlier bail application of
petitioner Cr.MP(M) No.2360 of 2024), this Court had
taken into account the factum of petitioner being an
accused in two more cases registered in different Police
Stations in the State of Punjab under ND&PS Act. Taking
into account the allegation of recovery of huge quantity of
contraband from the petitioner in the instant case, this
Court had formed an opinion that the petitioner might be
involved in dangerous drug trade, which is causing serious
erosion in the societal fabric and ultimately, the very
security and integrity of the Nation. Thus, it was found
that in view of the criminal history of petitioner, the
possibility of petitioner fleeing from course of justice, in
case released on bail, could not be ruled out.
5 2025:HHC:16777
11. The aforesaid factors had weighed with this
Court to decline prayer for bail; as against the right of bail
canvassed by the petitioner on account of delay in the
trial.
12. Now, this Court has been informed that the
petitioner has been convicted and sentenced in both the
cases which were taken into consideration by this Court
while deciding Cr.MP(M) No. 2360 of 2024. In one of the
matters, the petitioner has been convicted under Section
21 of the ND&PS Act and in the other for offence under
Section 15 of the same Act. Thus, in my considered view,
the circumstances as were considered while disposing of
previous bail application, have not changed, rather, have
aggravated. In available facts, again the possibility of
petitioner fleeing from the course of justice cannot be
ruled out, more particularly, when he is facing charge in
the instant case of being in conscious possession of more
than 8.00 Kgs. of Charas.
13. Keeping in view small number of remaining
prosecution witnesses, it is expected from the learned trial
Court that the trial shall be expedited.
6 2025:HHC:16777
14. In result, I find no merit in the instant petition
and the same is accordingly dismissed.
15. Any expression of opinion herein-above shall
have no bearing on the merits of the case and shall be
deemed only for the purpose of disposal of this petition.
(Satyen Vaidya)
30th May, 2025 Judge
(GR)
