The High Court of Himachal Pradesh dismissed the bail petition of an accused facing charges under the NDPS Act for possession of commercial quantity of charas. Citing a strict statutory bar under Section 37 and the severity of the punishment, the court held that bail will not be safe and the accused may abscond.
Bail prayer dismissed; trial to proceed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Cr.MP(M) No. 336 of 2024 Date of decision: 10.4.2024.
Sunil Dutt ...Petitioner.
Versus
State of H.P. ...Respondent
Coram:
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Satyen Vaidya, Judge .
Whether approved for reporting?1
For the petitioner : Mr. Udit Shaurya Kaushik, Advocate. For the respondent : Mr. L. N. Sharma, Addl. A.G.
Satyen Vaidya, Judge :
The petitioner has prayed for grant of bail in case FIR No. 91 of 2022 dated 1.6.2022, registered at Police Station, Jogindernagar, District Mandi, H.P. under Sections 20 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985 (for short, “the Act”).
1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
-2-
exclusive possession of 2.021 kg of charas on 1.6.2022 while travelling in vehicle No. HP62-2022 on GhatasniBarot road.
-3-
-4-
stage, in my considered view, will not be safe, when only two witnesses are required to be examined. There is every likelihood that the petitioner, in order to avoid the punishment, may abscond from the course of justice at the fag end of the trial. In above background, it cannot be said that the trial is not going to be concluded in reasonable time.
any observation made herein above.
10th April, 2024. (Satyen Vaidya) (kck) Judge
3 issues framed by the court
Whether bail is maintainable when the accused is in possession of a commercial quantity of narcotics under Section 37 bar of the NDPS Act.
Whether the delay in trial justifies the grant of bail under the circumstances.
Whether the balance of convenience favors releasing an accused facing severe punishment under the NDPS Act.
3 provisions across 1 enactments
Sunil Dutt
State of H.P.
Satyen Vaidya
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
