Harnoor Tuli Vs State of Hp — Narcotics (NDPS) | Himachal Pradesh HC (2025)

Harnoor Tuli Vs State of Hp — Narcotics (NDPS) | Himachal Pradesh HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Applicant Harnoor Tuli ordered released on bail during the pendency of trial in FIR No.60 of 2025 (Sections 21 & 29 NDPS Act, PS Nagrota Bagwan, District Kangra, H.P.) on furnishing personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with one surety in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court, subject to conditions: (a) regular attendance at trial Court; (b) no tampering with prosecution evidence nor hampering investigation; (c) no inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts; (d) no departure from India without prior permission of the Court. Registry directed to forward soft copy of the bail order to the Superintendent of Jail, Lala Lajpat Rai Open Air Jail & Correctional Home, Dharamshala, for e-prison entry.

Issue for consideration

Whether applicant Harnoor Tuli, arraigned in FIR No.60 of 2025 (Sections 21 & 29 NDPS Act, PS Nagrota Bagwan), is entitled to release on bail during the pendency of trial under Section 483 BNSS. +2 more

Court's answer

With the investigation complete and charge-sheet filed, and the chances of commencement and conclusion of trial in the near future not bright, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the applicant in judicial custody indefinitely; dismissal of the application would amount to pre-trial punishment, which is prohibited under the law.

Ratio / Principle

The contraband allegedly recovered (22 grams heroin/'chitta') does not fall within the definition of 'commercial quantity'; as such, the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act are not applicable in the present case.

Key takeaways

The Additional Advocate General's apprehension that the applicant is a resident of another State can be answered by imposing reasonable conditions while releasing the applicant on bail during the pendency of the trial.ratio¶19
On the ground of parity, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail, as his co-accused Rohit Arora has already been released on bail by this Court vide order dated 25.07.2025 in Cr.MP(M) No.1637 of 2025.ratio¶20
Caveat: the observations made in the order shall not be taken as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case, being confined only to the disposal of the bail application; the respondent-State is at liberty to move an appropriate application if any bail condition is violated.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail granted under Section 483 BNSS to applicant Harnoor Tuli (a 20-year-old law student with clean antecedents) arraigned in FIR No.60 of 2025, dated 30.04.2025, under Sections 21 & 29 NDPS Act, PS Nagrota Bagwan, District Kangra, H.P., arising from recovery of 22 grams heroin/'chitta' from beneath the gear-lever cover of vehicle PB46AD-6218 at Malan Chowk naka, with the applicant as companion of driver Prince Pal Singh. The Court held the recovered quantity does not fall within 'commercial quantity', hence rigors of Section 37 NDPS Act were inapplicable; investigation was complete with the charge-sheet filed; prospects of early commencement/conclusion of trial were dim, and continued detention would amount to prohibited pre-trial punishment; parity was drawn with co-accused Rohit Arora, released on bail by the same Court on 25.07.2025 (Cr.MP(M) No.1637 of 2025). Apprehension over the applicant being a resident of another State was met by imposing reasonable conditions. Release ordered on personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with one surety in the like amount, subject to standard conditions; observations expressly confined to the bail application and not the merits, with liberty to the State to seek action on violation of conditions.

( 2025:HHC:30676 ) .

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA

Cr.MP(M) No.2027 of 2025 Reserved on:- 04.09.2025 Date of Decision: 09.09.2025 Harnoor Tuli …Applicant Versus

State of H.P. …..Respondent Coram:

The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?¹

For the applicant : Mr. Vijender Katoch, Advocate. For the respondent : Mr. Tejasvi Sharma and Mr. H.S. Rawat, Additional Advocates General, with Mr. Rohit Sharma and Ms. Ranjna Patial, Deputy Advocates General, assisted by ASI Rajesh Kumar, Police Station, Nagrota Bagwan, District Kangra, H.P.

Virender Singh, Judge

By way of the present application, filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘BNSS’), applicant-Harnoor Tuli has sought his release, on bail, during the pendency of the trial, arising out of FIR No.60 of 2025, dated 30.04.2025, registered under Sections 21 & 29 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘NDPS Act’), with Police Station, Nagrota Bagwan, District Kangra, H.P.

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

( 2025:HHC:30676 ) .

According to the applicant, he is innocent person and has falsely been implicated, in this case.

According to him, he is having no connection whatsoever, with the crime in question and presently, he is in judicial custody.

It is the case of the applicant that the investigation, in this case is completed and nothing material remains to be recovered from his possession.

It is the further case of the applicant that he is a young boy of 20 years and is a law student, having clean antecedents, as, according to him, no criminal case has ever been registered against him.

According to the applicant, he is suffering from psychiatric problem and needs immediate medical attention.

The applicant had earlier tried his luck by moving similar application, bearing Registration No.271 of 2025, before the Court of learned Special Judge-II, Kangra at Dharamshala, District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh. However, the same was dismissed, vide order dated 05.08.2025.

It is the further case of the applicant that the contraband, so recovered, in this case does not fall within the

( 2025:HHC:30676 ) .

definition of ‘commercial quantity’. As such, rigors of Section 37 of NDPS Act, are not applicable, in the present case.

On the basis of the above facts, Mr. Vijender Katoch,

Advocate, appearing for the applicant, has given certain undertakings, on behalf of the applicant, for which, the applicant is ready to abide by, in case, ordered to be released on bail, during the pendency of the trial.

Apart from the above, the relief of bail has also been sought on the ground of parity, as, his co-accused Rohit Arora has already been released on bail, by this Court, vide order dated 25.07.2025, passed in Cr.MP(M) No.1637 of 2025.

On the basis of the above facts, a prayer has been made to allow the bail application.

When, put to notice, the police has filed the status report, disclosing therein, that on 30.04.2025, IO/ASI Rajesh Kumar, Police Station, Nagrota Bagwan, along with other police officials had left the Police Station, for patrolling duty and picketing duty in official vehicle. At about 6:30 AM, they had picketing at place known as Malan Chowk, near under construction flyover and were checking the vehicles there. In the meanwhile, they noticed a vehicle, being driven by its driver from Nagrota side, which was signalled to stop by ASI Rajesh Kumar.

( 2025:HHC:30676 ) .

The driver of the said vehicle stopped the vehicle, on the left side of the road. The registration number of the said vehicle was found to be PB46AD-6218 and on the front side, number plate of the said vehicle, the following words were found to be printed; “ Senior Vice President Punjab Anti Corruption Society Regd. Punjab”

12.1. Apart from the driver, another person was found sitting in the vehicle. Thereafter, IO demanded the requisite papers of the vehicle, upon which, the driver and his companion got perplexed. Hence, IO, developed a suspicion that some objectionable item could be there in the vehicle. As such, he has associated Sunil Kumar son of Jagdish Chand, Pradhan, Gram Panchayat, Malan and Sukhdev son of Tulsi Ram, Ward Panch, Ward No.5, Gram Panchayat, Malan, as independent witnesses, after apprising them the factual position.

12.2. Thereafter the name and address of the driver was ascertained, who disclosed his name as Prince Pal Singh son of Hardeep Singh, Street No.4, Fatechak, Tehsil and District Tarn Taran, (Punjab), whereas the other person disclosed his name as Harnoor Tuli son of Pawan Deep Tuli, Ward No.18, House No.11/16, Street Doctor Parmatma Singh Wali, Mohalla Jasewala, Tehsil and District Tarn Taran (Punjab), (applicant).

( 2025:HHC:30676 ) .

12.3 Thereafter, the vehicle was searched. During search, under the cover of the gear liver, a transparent polythene envelope was found, which was found containing another polythene envelope, having a brown coloured substance, which, on drug detection kit was found to be heroin/chitta. On weighment, the said chitta was found to be 22 grams. Other codal formalities were completed and after the registration of FIR, above two persons were arrested. They were remanded to police custody.

12.4. During investigation, Harnoor Tuli (applicant) and accused Prince Pal Singh, disclosed that they had purchased the chitta from Ravi alias Rohit Arora, who is working as a vehicle electrician at Tarn Taran (Punjab), on 29.04.2025, for a sum of Rs. 35,000/- out of which, Rs.15,000/- was paid in cash and Rs.20,000/- was transferred through Google Pay in the account of Ravi alias Rohit Arora.

12.5. Consequently, Ravi alias Rohit Arora was associated in the investigation and was arrested. After receiving the positive report, the police has prepared the charge sheet and submitted in the competent Court of law.

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

( 2025:HHC:30676 ) .

The contraband allegedly recovered, in the present case, does not fall within the definition of commercial quantity. As such, rigors of Section 37 of NDPS Act, are not applicable, in the present case.

The applicant is presumed to be innocent, as except the present case, no other case has been found to be registered against him.

Investigation, in the present case, is complete, as the police has already filed the charge sheet in the competent Court of law.

Moreover, the chances of commencement and conclusion of trial against the applicant, in near future, are not so bright. As such, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the applicant in the judicial custody, that too, for the indefinite period.

Considering the fact that presently the applicant is in judicial custody, this Court is of the view that dismissal of the application would be nothing, but, pre-trial punishment, which is prohibited under the law.

So far as the apprehension of the learned Additional Advocate General, qua the fact that the applicant is resident of another State is concerned, for that apprehension, reasonable

( 2025:HHC:30676 ) .

conditions, can be imposed, in case, the applicant is ordered to be released on bail, during the pendency of the trial.

Moreover, on the ground of parity also, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail, as his co-accused Rohit Arora has already been released on bail, by this Court, vide order dated 25.07.2025, passed in Cr.MP(M) No.1637 of 2025.

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

Consequently, the applicant is ordered to be released on bail, in case FIR No.60 of 2025, dated 30.04.2025, registered under Sections 21 & 29 of the NDPS Act, with Police Station, Nagrota Bagwan, District Kangra, H.P., on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/-, with one surety in the like amount, to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.

This order, however, shall be subject to the following

conditions:-

a) The applicant 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;

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

( 2025:HHC:30676 ) .

c) The applicant 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

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

Any of the observations, made hereinabove, 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.

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

The Registry is directed to forward a soft copy of the bail order to the Superintendent of Jail, Lala Lajpat Rai Open Air Jail & Correctional Home, Dharamshala, District Kangra, H.P., through e-mail, with a direction to enter the date of grant of bail in the eprison software.

In case, the applicant is not released within a period of seven days from the date of grant of bail, the Superintendent of Jail, Lala Lajpat Rai Open Air Jail & Correctional Home, Dharamshala, District Kangra, H.P., is directed to inform this fact to the Secretary, DLSA, Kangra, District Kangra, H.P. The Superintendent of Jail, Lala Lajpat Rai Open Air Jail &

( 2025:HHC:30676 ) .

Correctional Home, Dharamshala, District Kangra, H.P, Himachal Pradesh, is further directed that if the applicant fails 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.

(Virender Singh) Judge

September 09, 2025

(subhash)

RAJNI

Digitally signed by RAJNI Date: 2025.09.09 11:06:25 +0530