Naresh Kumar Vs State of Hp — Narcotics (NDPS) | Himachal Pradesh HC (2025)

Naresh Kumar Vs State of Hp — Narcotics (NDPS) | Himachal Pradesh HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Impugned order dated 07.07.2025 imposing Rs.50,000/- penalty on the appellant-surety set aside; trial Court directed to decide the matter afresh in view of the order dated 15.09.2025 of the learned ACJM, Court No.1, Paonta Sahib; appeal and pending application(s) disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether the penalty of Rs.50,000/- imposed on the appellant, who stood surety to accused Mohd. Sameer (declared a proclaimed offender), should be set aside in view of the subsequent development that the accused was arrested on information given by the sureties.

Court's answer

In view of the order dated 15.09.2025 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.1, Paonta Sahib, District Sirmaur, this Court is of the considered opinion that this aspect of the matter is required to be considered by the same Court which imposed the penalty.

Ratio / Principle

The order dated 07.07.2025 passed by the learned trial Court is set aside.

Key takeaways

The learned trial Court is directed to decide the matter afresh, in view of the subsequent development pointed out in the order dated 15.09.2025 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.1, Paonta Sahib, District Sirmaur, H.P.ratio¶23

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Surety penalty – setting aside and fresh decision. Naresh Kumar, surety of accused Mohd. Sameer (declared a proclaimed offender in FIR No. 49/18 dated 04.03.2018 under Section 20 NDPS Act), was penalised Rs.50,000/- by order dated 07.07.2025 of the learned Special Judge-II, Nahan, in proceedings under Section 446 Cr.PC (491 BNSS). Counsel placed on record the order dated 15.09.2025 of the learned ACJM, Court No.1, Paonta Sahib, showing that the accused was arrested on 15.09.2025 at Saharanpur, the P.O. Cell acting on information given by the three sureties (Naresh Kumar, Dharampal and Rajesh), and that an FIR under Section 209 BNS had been registered. Held: the aspect is required to be considered by the same Court which imposed the penalty; the order dated 07.07.2025 was set aside and the trial Court directed to decide the matter afresh in view of the subsequent development. Appeal under Section 495 BNSS disposed of. (Virender Singh, J., oral; decided 08.10.2025.)

2025:HHC:34095

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA

Criminal Appeal No. : 486 of 2025 Decided on : 08^th October, 2025 Naresh Kumar …...Appellant Versus State of Himachal Pradesh …...Respondent

Coram:

The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge.

Whether approved for reporting?¹

For the appellant :	Mr. Servedaman Rathore, Advocate.
For the respondent :	Mr. H.S. Rawat, Additional Advocate General.

Virender Singh, Judge (Oral)

Appellant Naresh Kumar has preferred the present appeal, under Section 495 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘BNSS’), against the order dated 07.07.2025, passed by the Court of learned Special Judge-II, Nahan, District Sirmaur, H.P. (hereinafter referred to as ‘trial Court’), in a case, arising out of the proceedings, initiated under Section 446 of the Cr.PC (491 of the BNSS) bearing registration No.328-N/4 of 2025, titled as State of Himachal Pradesh versus Naresh Kumar.

1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

2025:HHC:34095

2

By way of order dated 07.07.2025, penalty of

Rs.50,000/- was imposed upon the appellant, who stood surety to accused Mohd. Sameer.

Today, learned counsel for the appellant has placed on record the photocopy of order dated 15.09.2025, passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.1, Paonta Sahib, District Sirmaur, H.P., in case, titled as State versus Mohd. Sameer. Relevant portion of the order, is reproduced, as under:-

“ It is stated in the application that in pursuance to the order dated 07.07.2025 of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nahan, District Sirmaur, H.P., in case FIR No. 49/18 dated 04.03.2018, under Section 20 of the NDPS Act, whereby the present accused namely Mohd. Sameer was declared a proclaimed offender, an FIR under Section 209 BNS was registered against the accused giving rise to the present proceedings, wherein the accused was arrested today i.e. on 15.09.2025 at Saharanpur.

Three sureties of the accused namely Naresh Kumar, Dharampal and Rajesh are present in person. The I.O. has disclosed that the accused was nabbed by the P.O. Cell at the information given by the above sureties.”

In view of the order passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court No.1, Paonta Sahib, District Sirmaur, this Court is of the considered opinion that this aspect

2025:HHC:34095

3

of the matter is required to be considered by the same Court, which has imposed the penalty.

Consequently, the order dated 07.07.2025, passed by the learned trial Court is set aside, with a direction to the learned trial Court to decide the matter afresh, in view of the subsequent development, as pointed out, in order dated 15.09.2025, passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.1, Paonta Sahib, District Sirmaur, H.P.

With these observations, the appeal is disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any.

Record be sent back.

(Virender Singh)

Judge October 08, 2025 (ps)