Mohit Kumar Vs State of Hp

2025:HHC:30666

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRA	DESH, SHIMLA
Cr.MPs(M) No. : 1984, Reserved on	2030 & 2031 of 2025 : 04.09.2025
Decided on	: 09.09.2025
CrMP(M) No. 1984 of 2025
Mohit Kumar Versus	…Applicant
State of Himachal Pradesh	…Respondent
CrMP(M) No. 2030 of 2025
Pradeep Kumar Versus	…Applicant
State of Himachal Pradesh	…Respondent
CrMP(M) No. 2031 of 2025
Sonu Versus	…Applicant
State of Himachal Pradesh	…Respondent
Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Ju Whether approved for reporting?¹	dge.
________________________________________________ For the applicants : Mr.Balram Sha Advocate, with Bhatt, Advocate.	_______________ rma, Senior Mr.Jyotirmay

¶3

1 Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes.

¶4

2025:HHC:30666

¶5

2

¶6

For the respondent : Mr.Tejasvi Sharma & Mr.H.S. Rawat, Additional Advocates General with Mr.Rohit Sharma & Ms. Ranjna Patial, Deputy Advocates General, assisted by HC Jaivanti No. 81, Police Station Sadar Solan, H.P.

¶7

Virender Singh, Judge

¶8

The abovetitled bail applications are being disposed of by the common order, as the applicants have preferred these applications, under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘BNSS’), for releasing them on bail, during the pendency of the trial, arising out of FIR No. 76/2025, dated 02.04.2025, registered under Sections 21 & 29 of Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (hereinafter referred to as “the ND&PS Act”), with Police Station Sadar Solan, District Solan, H.P.

¶9

According to the applicants, applicant Pradeep Kumar and Mohit Kumar were arrested on 02.04.2025, whereas applicant Sonu was arrested on 30.04.2025, in the above noted FIR.

¶10

According to the applicants, they are innocent persons and have falsely been implicated, in the present case. No recovery of any contraband was effected from

¶11

2025:HHC:30666

¶12

3

¶13

them. They have termed the case of the prosecution as false.

¶14

According to the applicants, the alleged recovered contraband does not fall within the definition of commercial quantity, as such rigors of Section 37 of ND&PS Act are not applicable, in this case.

¶15

The investigation of the present case is stated to be completed and applicants have stated that they are ready to abide by the terms and conditions to be imposed by this Court, in case, they are ordered to be released on bail, during the pendency of the trial.

¶16

Applicant Mohit Kumar has tried his luck by filing similar bail application before the Court of learned Special Judge, Solan, however, the said application was dismissed, on 11.06.2025.

¶17

On the basis of the above facts, Mr. Balram Sharma, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Jyotirmay Bhatt, learned Counsel appearing for the applicants, has prayed that the present applications may kindly be allowed.

¶18

When put to notice, the police has filed the status report, disclosing therein, that on 02.04.2025, HC Virender No. 60, I.O. Police Station Sadar Solan, alongwith

¶19

2025:HHC:30666

¶20

4

¶21

police officials, was on patrolling duty to detect the crime, relating to excise and when, he along with the other police officials, while on patrolling, reached at Dohari Deewar Saproon, then, HC Shubham Thakur No. 80, along with his team, also met them.

¶22

8.1 At about 6:30 pm, HC Virender Kumar received a secret information regarding the fact that from KFC/MOCHA side, two young men, namely Pradeep and Mohit were coming on foot. Pradeep had worn police uniform and having a rucksack bag on his back, whereas Mohit had worn white half sleeved shirt and blue pants. As per the information, both of them, in connivance with each other, came from another State, along with Chitta/heroin and are about to sell the same in Solan city.

¶23

8.2 As per the information, if both the accused persons are caught and searched, huge quantity of chitta/heroin can be recovered. The said information was found to be credible and reliable. As per the I.O., in case he would have obtained authorization letter or search warrants, in that eventuality, chances were there that the contraband could be removed and said two young men may flee away. As such, Section 42(2) of ND&PS Act was

¶24

2025:HHC:30666

¶25

5

¶26

complied with and report was sent to Supervisory Officer, Solan.

¶27

8.3 Thereafter, the I.O. apprised the police officials about the information and they had started searching for the above two young men towards KFC/Mocha bifurcation. When they reached at Saproon Chowk, underneath the bridge, on fourlane bypass, then they noticed two young men. Thereafter, I.O. had given his identification and the identification of the police team to them and also apprised them about the secret information.

¶28

8.4 At that time, two persons, who were crossing from there, were requested to associate in the investigation, upon which, both of them had agreed to do so. On inquiry, said persons disclosed their names as Bhupendra Jaggi and Sanjay Kumar Sahni. In the presence of said two persons, the names and addresses of the persons, so nabbed, were inquired. The person, who had worn the police dress and having a rucksack, disclosed his name as Pradeep Kumar son of Sh. Mange Ram (applicant in Cr. MP(M) No. 2020 of 2025), whereas the other person disclosed his name as Mohit son of Sh. Sushil Kumar (applicant in Cr.MP(M) No. 1984 of 2025).

¶29

2025:HHC:30666

¶30

6

¶31

Both the said persons were found to be resident of District Kaithal, Haryana.

¶32

8.5 Thereafter, the rucksack was searched and during search of the rucksack, a black coloured polythene envelope, alongwith an electronic weighing machine, was found. On opening the said polythene envelope, the same was found containing white coloured powdered and granular shaped substance, which, on checking on drug detection kit, was found to be chitta/heroin and on weighing, it was found to be 157 grams. Other codol formalities were completed. Thereafter, FIR was registered and both the accused persons were arrested.

¶33

8.6 Subsequently on 03.04.2025, the case property was produced before the Court for conducting the inventory proceedings under Section 52A of ND&PS Act and accused persons were produced before the Court and they were remanded for five days police custody.

¶34

8.7 Applicant Pradeep was found to be working as Head Constable in Haryana police and under the garb of dress, he had come to sell chitta in uniform. His uniform was also taken into possession.

¶35

2025:HHC:30666

¶36

7

¶37

8.8 During investigation, it was found that on 01.04.2025, accusedapplicants Pradeep Kumar and Mohit came to Shimla in Sonu’s car bearing No. HR83A5896. They had stayed in a hotel at Shimla on 02.04.2025. After hiring a vehicle from Shimla, they had gone to Narkanda, however, they could not get the suitable rate, as such, they had not sold the same and came back.

¶38

8.9 Thereafter, Pradeep and Mohit had gone to Solan to sell the chitta and were nabbed, whereas accused Sonu (applicant in Cr.MP(M) No. 2031 of 2025) fled away from the spot, alongwith his car, upon which, accused Mohit had identified hotel Ganga, The Mall Shimla on 04.04.2025, where the entry form, photocopy of identify card of applicant Pradeep Kumar and CCTV footage of accusedapplicants Pradeep, Mohit and Sonu was taken into possession. Efforts were made to nab applicantSonu, but, he was found to be underground.

¶39

8.10 The positive report has been received from SFSL Junga.

¶40

8.11 On 28.04.2025, a special team was constituted

¶41

under the leadership of SI Gopal Singh, who had nabbed

¶42

2025:HHC:30666

¶43

8

¶44

Sonu and he was brought to Police Station and he was arrested.

¶45

8.12 During police remand, he has also made the confessional statement, disclosing therein, that on 02.04.2025, he has parked his vehicle on bypass road Solan and can get the same recovered, upon which, he had got recovered the vehicle No. HR83A5896, Tata Nexon, which was also taken into possession.

¶46

8.13 During investigation, according to the police, it was found that accused persons purchased 157 grams Chitta from one Nigerien Bravo at Delhi for Rs. 2,80,000/ on 27.03.2025. Thereafter efforts were made to call said Nigerien through applicant Sonu, but his mobile phone was found to be switched off.

¶47

8.14 On the basis of CCTV footage, it has also been found that all the three persons had stayed in Hotel Ganga at Shimla. Applicants Mohit and Pradeep are confined in District Jail Solan, whereas, applicant Sonu is confined in Model Central Jail Nahan.

¶48

8.15 So far as the criminal history of the applicants is concerned, as per the status report, applicant Sonu is having the following case registered against him:

¶49

2025:HHC:30666

¶50

9

¶51

FIR No. 360/2023, dated 03.11.2023, under Sections 21 ND&PS Act, with Police Station Kalayat, Haryana and the case is under consideration; and

¶52

FIR No. 128/2025, dated 18.05.2025, under Sections 25(1B)(a) of Arms Act, with Police Station Kaithal, Haryana.

¶53

No case was found to be registered against applicants Pradeep and Mohit.

¶54

On the basis of above facts, a prayer has been made to dismiss the applications.

¶55

The contraband, allegedly recovered in the present case, is 157 grams chitta, which admittedly does not fall, within the definition of ‘commercial quantity’. As such, the rigors of Section 37 of the ND&PS Act are not applicable, in this case.

¶56

The investigation, in the present case, is complete, as, the police has taken the stand that the chargesheet has been filed in the competent Court of Law and case is now listed on 18.09.2025, for consideration on charge, before the learned Special JudgeII Solan, District Solan, H.P. From the said fact, it can be said that chances of commencement and conclusion of the trial, against the applicants, in near future, are not so bright.

¶57

2025:HHC:30666

¶58

10

¶59

Moreover, pretrial punishment is prohibited under the law. The punishment also cannot be inflicted before the conclusion of the trial.

¶60

At the time of deciding the bail applications, detailed discussion about the merits of the case should be avoided, as the same should cause prejudice to the case of the prosecution as well as the case of the accused persons.

¶61

While deciding the bail applications, the main focus of the Court should be on the seriousness of the offences, availability of the applicant(s) for trial and apprehensions, if any, expressed by the police. Although, in the status report, no apprehension has been expressed by the police, but it has been argued by the learned Additional Advocate General, that applicant Pradeep Kumar is a police official and allegedly had caught with contraband and in case he is ordered to be released on bail, he may coerce the witnesses. Similarly, criminal history of applicant Sonu has also been highlighted to decline the relief to him.

¶62

In the given facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that the above apprehensions are too short to decline the relief to the

¶63

2025:HHC:30666

¶64

11

¶65

applicants, as applicants Pradeep Kumar and Mohit are in custody, since 03.04.2025 and accused Sonu has been arrested, in this case, on 30.04.2025. This Court is of the view that no useful purpose would be served by keeping the applicants in the judicial custody, that too, for the indefinite period.

¶66

So far as, the arguments of learned Additional Advocate General, qua the fact that the applicants are resident of adjoining State i.e. Haryana, and may not be available for the trial, in case, ordered to be released on bail are concerned, for those apprehensions, reasonable conditions can be imposed upon the applicants, in case, they are ordered to be released on bail, during the pendency of the trial.

¶67

Considering all these facts, this Court is of the view that the present bail applications are liable to be allowed and are accordingly allowed.

¶68

Consequently, the applicants are ordered to be released, on bail, in case FIR No. 76/2025, dated 02.04.2025, registered with Police Station Sadar Solan, District Solan, H.P., under Sections 21 and 29 of the NDPS Act, on their furnishing personal bonds in the sum of Rs.

¶69

2025:HHC:30666

¶70

12

¶71

1,00,000/ each, with two sureties each, of the like amount

¶72

each, to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. However, this order shall be subject to the following conditions:

¶73

a) The applicants shall regularly 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 the appropriate application;

¶74

b) The applicants shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence nor hamper the investigation of the case in any manner whatsoever;

¶75

c) The applicants shall not make any inducement, threat or promises to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or the Police Officer; and

¶76

d) The applicants shall not leave the territory of India without the prior permission of the Court.

¶77

Any of the observations, made hereinabove,

¶78

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.

¶79

It is made clear that respondentState is at liberty to move an appropriate application, in case, any of the bail conditions is found violated by any of the applicants.

¶80

2025:HHC:30666

¶81

13

¶82

The Registry is directed to forward a soft copy of the bail order to the Superintendents of Jail, District Jail Solan, H.P. and Model Central Jail, Nahan, H.P. through e mail, with a direction to enter the date of grant of bail in the eprison software.

¶83

In case, the applicants are not released within a

¶84

period of seven days from the date of grant of bail, the Superintendents of Jail, District Jail Solan, H.P. and Model Central Jail Nahan, H.P., are directed to inform this fact to the Secretary, DLSA, Solan. The Superintendents of Jail, District Jail Solan, H.P. and Model Central Jail Nahan, H.P., are further directed that if the applicants fail to furnish the bail bonds, as per the order passed by this Court, within a period of one month from today, then, the said fact be submitted to this Court.

¶85

09^th September, 2025

¶86

(Virender Singh) Judge

¶87

( Pramod Kumar )

¶88

Digitally signed by RAJNI Date: 2025.09.09 RAJNI 10:49:20 +0530

Mohit Kumar v. State of Hp

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohit Kumar v. State of Hp

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sudhir Hudda and Ors. Vs State of Hp

Budhi Prakash @ Ramesh Chand and Others Vs State of Hp and Another

Padam Prakash Vs State of Hp

Harnoor Tuli Vs State of Hp

Ram Saran Vs Hem Chand Thakur

Vipan Kumar Vs State of Hp