Ujjwal Mehta Vs State of Hp

2025:HHC:31341 )

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA Cr.MP(M) No.2129 of 2025 Reserved on: 08.09.2025 Date of Decision: 12.09.2025 Ujjwal Mehta …Applicant

¶3

Versus

¶4

State of H.P. …..Respondent Coram:

¶5

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

¶6

For the applicant : Mr. Hitansh Raj, Advocate. For the respondent : Mr. Varun Chandel, Additional Advocate General with Mr. Rohit Sharma, Deputy Advocate General, assisted by HC Jaiwanti, Police Station, Sadar Solan, District Solan, H.P.

¶7

Virender Singh, Judge

¶8

Applicant-Ujjwal, has filed the present application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘BNSS’), for releasing him, on bail, during the pendency of the trial, arising out of FIR No.242 of 2019, dated 17.11.2019, registered under Sections 21 & 29

¶9

of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘NDPS Act’), with Police Station, Sadar Solan, District Solan, H.P.

¶10

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

¶11

2025:HHC:31341 )

¶12

According to the applicant, he is innocent person and

¶13

has falsely been implicated, in this case for allegedly possessing 29.72 grams of heroine/chitta.

¶14

The applicant was earlier released on bail by this Court on 06.12.2019. However, on 19.06.2025, due to miscommunication of the date, he could not appear before the learned trial Court, as such, Non Bailable warrants were issued for 01.08.2025. On that day he had surrender himself to the custody of Court (trial Court) and he was sent to judicial custody.

¶15

Thereafter he has applied for bail before the learned trial Court i.e. learned Special Judge-III, Solan, Himachal Pradesh, however, his bail application has been dismissed on 25.08.2025.

¶16

The applicant has put forward miscommunication to be the reason for his non-appearance on 19.06.2025, before the learned trial Court.

¶17

On the basis of the above facts, Mr. Hitansh Raj, 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.

¶18

2025:HHC:31341 )

¶19

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

¶20

When, put to notice, the police has filed the status report, disclosing therein, that on 17.11.2019, IO Sub Inspector Sanjay Kumar, SIU Solan had submitted a rukka to Police Station Sadar Solan, disclosing therein that on 16.11.2019 he along with other police officials, was on patrolling duty and duty to detect the crime towards Solan side. At about 11:50 PM, when he was present at Saproon Chowk, then he received a secret information that a Vehicle No.HP06A-6148 being driven by its driver coming from Chandigarh and four persons are there in the said vehicle and they are carrying the heroine/chitta by concealing the same in the dashboard of the vehicle.

¶21

8.1. As per the information, if the said vehicle is intercepted and searched then, a large quantity of heroine/chitta could be recovered. The said information was found to be authentic and reliable and as such, he has prepared the information under Section 42(2) of NDPS Act, and submitted the same to the Supervising Officer. Thereafter he has proceeded towards Rabon bye pass side. At about 12:15 AM, he was present and put the picketing near Tapan Motors and started checking the vehicles coming from Kumarhatti side.

¶22

2025:HHC:31341 )

¶23

8.2. Meanwhile, at about 12:24 AM (midnight), he noticed a Car bearing No.HP06A-6148, being driven by its driver, coming from Kumarhatti side. The said vehicle was stopped and four persons were found to be sitting in the vehicle. Prior to searching the vehicle, a person, who was present on duty, with Tapan Petrol Pump, namely Vinod Kumar was associated in the investigation.

¶24

8.3. Apart from this, one Joginder Singh, son of Chanderdhari Singh, has also been associated in the investigation. In the presence of the above two persons, name of the persons, who were sitting in the vehicle was inquired. The driver disclosed his name as Ujjwal Mehta (applicant) and other accused persons disclosed their names as Kinchit Chauhan, Suneet Nirala and K-Avin. When the vehicle was searched, from the dashboard of the same, the chitta weighing 29.72 grams was recovered. Other codal formalities were completed and after registration of the FIR, all the four accused persons were arrested.

¶25

8.4 It is the further case of the police that investigation, in the present case, is complete and the charge sheet has been filed before the learned trial Court. In this case, there are 18

¶26

2025:HHC:31341 )

¶27

witnesses, out of which 1 has been examined. The applicant was earlier released on bail by this Court on 06.12.2019.

¶28

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

¶29

As per the stand taken in the bail application, the applicant is in judicial custody from 01.08.2025, as, he could not put appearance before the learned trial Court on 19.06.2025.

¶30

According to the stand of the applicant, he has surrendered voluntarily before the learned trial Court on 01.08.2025. He has tried his luck before the learned trial Court, however, his application has been dismissed on 25.08.2025.

¶31

Considering the period of custody and the explanation, according to which, due to some miscommunication, the applicant could not put appearance before the learned trial Court on 19.06.2025, this Court is of the view that no useful purpose would be served, by keeping the applicant in judicial custody that too, for the indefinite period, as the chances of conclusion of trial, against the applicant, in near future are not so bright, and pre-trial punishment is prohibited under the law.

¶32

2025:HHC:31341 )

¶33

However, considering his past record, stringent conditions are required to be imposed, in case, the applicant is ordered to be released on bail.

¶34

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

¶35

Consequently, the applicant is ordered to be released on bail in case FIR No. 242 of 2019, dated 17.11.2019, registered under Sections 21 and 29 of the NDPS Act, with Police Station, Sadar Solan, District Solan, H.P. , on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/-, with two sureties of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.

¶36

This order, however, shall be subject to the following

¶37

conditions:-

¶38

a) The applicant shall appear before the IO, as and when, directed by the IO to do so and 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;

¶39

b) That the applicant will not leave India, without prior permission of the Court;

¶40

c) That the applicant will not directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any

¶41

2025:HHC:31341 )

¶42

person, acquainted with the facts of the case, so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Investigating Officer or the Court; and

¶43

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

¶44

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.

¶45

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.

¶46

The Registry is directed to forward a soft copy of the bail order to the Superintendent of Jail, Sub Jail Solan, District Solan, H.P., through e-mail, with a direction to enter the date of grant of bail in the eprison software.

¶47

In case, the applicant is not released within a period of seven days from the date of grant of bail, the Superintendent of Jail, Sub Jail Solan, District Solan, Himachal Pradesh, is directed

¶48

to inform this fact to the Secretary, DLSA, Solan, District Solan, H.P. The Superintendent of Jail, Sub Jail Solan, District Solan, H.P, Himachal Pradesh, is further directed that if the applicant fails

¶49

to furnish the bail bonds, as per the order passed by this Court,

¶50