Sandeep Shah Vs State of Hp

2025:HHC:42909

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

Cr.MP(M) No.2654 of 2025 Date of Decision: 09.12.2025

______________________ Sandeep Shah State of Himachal Pr	_____ adesh	_________________ Versus	_______ …… ….	__________________ ...Petitioner ...Respondents
Coram
Hon’ble Mr. Justice S Whether approved fo	ande r rep	ep Sharma, Judg orting? Yes.	e.
For the Petitioner:	Mr.	Hitender Verma,	Advoca	te.
For the Respondent:	Mr. Add Cha Adv	Rajan Kahol itional Advocates uhan and Mr. ocates General, fo	& Mr. Gener Anish r State	Vishal Panwar, al, with Mr. Ravi Banshtu, Deputy .
	SI Shi	Hem Raj, P.S. mla, present alon	Sadar g with r	Shimla, District ecord.
_______________________ Sandeep Sharma, J .(_	______ Oral)	__________________	________	___________________

¶5

By way of present application filed under S.483 of Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the petitioner, who is behind the bars since 7.2.2025, in connection with FIR No. 45, dated 9.4.2024 under Ss. 21 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, registered at Police Station Sadar, District Shimla, Himachal Pradesh, is seeking regular bail.

¶6

Facts of the case, leading to registration of FIR against the bail petitioner and his arrest are that on 8.4.2024, a police party led by SI Gian chand was on patrolling duty, when they noticed a youth standing in street light in front of Chicken Fry kiosk, on upper side of road near Lalpani Bus Stop. When police approached him for enquiry,

¶7

2025:HHC:42909

¶8

2

¶9

said person took out something from left pocket of his trousers and threw in the drain and started off towards ISBT. Said person, on suspicion was nabbed, the item thrown by him in drain was recovered. In the meantime, a person namely Ankit Kumar son of Rajender Kumar, happened to pass, who was requested to become witness, to which he agreed and in his presence, identity of person was ascertained who disclosed his name as Veer Singh son of Shatrughan, resident of Mohan Purva, Tehsil Banda, Uttar Pradesh. The item thrown by said person was found to be heroin/chitta, weighing 7.98 grams. Seizure and sealing was conducted on the spot. Rukka was sent to Police Station Sadar, where aforesaid FIR was registered. Aforesaid Veer Singh was arrested on 9.4.2024 at 6.15 am.

¶10

During investigation, it transpired that said Veer Singh firstly brought 15 grams chitta from Kashmiri Gate, Delhi from one Veer Nepali and sold to two persons and then again brought 20 grams chitta which was sold to persons namely Prakash and Harish. So far present petitioner is concerned, Veer Singh allegedly disclosed that he (Sandeep Shah) contacted him through virtual No. +351934491260 and asked him to receive and sell Chitta in Shimla, through courier and made arrangements for his stay through Santosh Kumar alias Prince. Said Veer Singh allegedly disclosed that he received 10 gram and 15 gram chitta through courier on 4th April and 8th April, 2024, out of which 5 gram chitta each was taken by Santosh Kumar and rest

¶11

2025:HHC:42909

¶12

3

¶13

was sold by Veer Singh, out of which 7.98 gram chitta is the contraband involved in the FIR. It appears that said Santosh Kumar alias Prince was arrested and during investigation, he admitted that on the askance of present bail petitioner, he had made arrangement for stay of Veer Singh. Police have recovered screenshots from mobile phone of Santosh Kumar, showing supply, transactions and salepurchase of chitta. Police also found that persons who purchased chitta, made payment to Sandeep Shah through UPI ID prembist199@okaxis/prembist199@oksbi, which is in the name of Champa Devi/Prem Singh. Santosh Kumar admitted that he sent screenshots of payment to Sandeep Shah on whatsapp and used to call him on whatsapp to avoid call recording.

¶14

During investigation, it transpired that said account of Mrs. Champa Devi used to be operated by her son Prahlad Singh, who was associated in the investigation, who further admitted that he had been using said account of his mother for transactions relating to sale/purchase of Chitta and he had sent chitta two times from Delhi to Shimla. Said Prahlad Singh was also arrayed as an accused, arrested and sent on police remand, on 20.5.2024. Since all the above named persons indicated towards present bail petitioner, police tried to obtain documents of virtual No. +351934491260 but no record could be traced. Data from mobile phones of Veer Singh alias Lovely and Santosh Kumar alias Prince was sent for preservation to SFSL

¶15

2025:HHC:42909

¶16

4

¶17

Junga, and after result was received, present bail petitioner was formally arrested on 21.4.2025 and sent on four days’ police remand.

¶18

During police custody, present bail petitioner disclosed that during his stay in Delhi, he came in contact with a person of African ethnicity, who used to supply heroin and present bail petitioner started supplying chitta/heroin in Shimla. It has come in investigation that in 2021, present bail petitioner alongwith two others was apprehended in Dhalli, with heroin and after getting out from jail, went again to Delhi and aforesaid African person, introduced him to using virtual number +351934491260, which the present bail petitioner activated in his mobile phone through whatsapp OTP. Said mobile phone is in custody of policy in FIR No. 107/24. Through this virtual number, the present bail petitioner got acquainted with Veer Singh alias Lovely and Santosh Kumar alias Prince alias Gappa. It has come in the investigation that Sandeep Shah, used to supply heroin to Prahlad Singh alias Veer Nepali and said Prahlad used to send the same to Shimla. Police have found that transaction used to be in cash, sometimes in the account of Mrs. Champa Devi, mother of Prahlad and sometimes, Sandeep Shah used to receive payments on QR code of his shop, by sending QR code through virtual number, because, his account in Kotak Bank i.e. A/c No. 0514366463 was closed in June, 2022, being under investigation.

¶19

2025:HHC:42909

¶20

5

¶21

In short, the involvement of the present bail petitioner in

¶22

this entire nexus, as per police is that Veer Singh used to receive chitta through courier sent from Delhi, at Shimla and then sell it, whereas, Santosh Kumar used to help Veer Singh and accused Prahlad Singh used to enter into financial transaction by using bank account of his mother, Mrs. Champa Devi and used to send heroin from Delhi to Shimla, through courier.

¶23

So far history of present bail petitioner is concerned, there are as many as six criminal cases registered against him, out of which five relate to offences punishable under Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act. As per police, Sandeep Shah is involved in drug trafficking since 2021. Following cases are registered against the present bail petitioner:

¶24

FIR No. 198, dated 19.9.2020 under Ss. 376, 506 and 417 IPC registered at Police Station West, Shimla, which is under trial.

¶25

FIR No. 190, dated 13.10.2021 under Ss. 21, 25 and 29 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, involving 33.23 grams heroin, registered at Police Station Dhalli, Shimla, which is again under trial.

¶26

FIR No. 108, dated 27.8.2022 under Ss. 21, 25 and 29 of the aforesaid Act, involving 150 grams of heroin, registered at Police Station Balongi SAS Nagar, Punjab, which is again under trial.

¶27

2025:HHC:42909

¶28

6

¶29

FIR No. 70, dated 7.5.2024, under Ss. 21, 25, 29 of Act ibid, registered at Police Station Theog, Shimla, which is under trial and present bail petitioner was named for offence under S.29, and;

¶30

FIR No. 107, dated 18.8.2024, under Ss. 21, 29 and 27A of afore Act and S.111 of BNS, registered at Police Station Sadar, Shimla, where investigation is going on.

¶31

Present is the sixth FIR in total and fifth qua same offence. Not only this, he has been declared proclaimed offender on 17.1.2025 in FIR No. 190, dated 13.10.2021. After being declared as proclaimed offender in case registered at Police Station Dhalli, police found that present bail petitioner started drug trafficking in Mohali Punjab and in FIR No. 108, huge quantity of 150 grams of heroin was recovered from the flat of present bail petitioner. In this case, present bail petitioner was granted bail, but he did not appear on hearing, due to which court of learned Additional Sessions Judge/JSC SAS Nagar, Mohali also declared him as proclaimed offender on 18.3.2024. Besides this, present bail petitioner did not appear in the trial court in connection with FIR No. 198, registered at Police Station West and there proclamation proceedings were initiated on 9.1.2025.

¶32

Another aspect of the matter is that during investigation, police found multiple addresses of present bail petitioner shown in Adhaar Card, in account maintained in Kotak Mahindra Bank, Utkarsh Small Finance Bank, FIR No. 108 and 190, CAF of mobile SIM No. 89104-16990 and as per interrogation, present bail petitioner has

¶33

2025:HHC:42909

¶34

7

¶35

been found to be residing at temporary address 1-C Destiny Tower Apartment, 1st Floor Phase-1, Chinar Park Kolkata, West Bengal under pseudonym “Arun Kumar”

¶36

From the above facts, it is clear that there are multiple cases registered against the present bail petitioner and he has multiple addresses registered with different banks, Police Stations etc. and he has been declared proclaimed offender three times. Not only this, petitioner’s involvement is right from 2020 till date, therefore, the grounds raised by present bail petitioner for grant of bail, are not available to him viz. false implication, no evidence, possibility of not fleeing from law. Besides this, there is no reason offered by present bail petitioner as to why he has been falsely implicated in the case. Not only this, in the bail application, the present bail petitioner has mentioned under para-11 that only four cases are pending against him, whereas, it is actually five.

¶37

The bail petitioner has been declared proclaimed offender three times, which casts a doubt, on his undertaking to appear before the trial court and very principle for grant of bail i.e. possibility of party appearing in trial/investigation, seems to be operating against the present bail petitioner.

¶38

So far personal liberty and freedom of the present bail petitioner is concerned, though, same cannot be curtailed for an indefinite time during trial, but seeing the history of the present bail

¶39

2025:HHC:42909

¶40

8

¶41

petitioner, it seems that if his personal liberty and freedom are protected, same may be a bane for the society. This Country, especially the State of Himachal Pradesh is dealing with drug menace, with a majority of its youth in the clutches of drug mafia. The parents of the children in the State are no more worried about the careers of their children, rather they are more worried about their children getting into drugs. Drug menace and its ancillary effects have become a national crisis in the country.

¶42

Though, it is a settled principle of criminal jurisprudence that a person is deemed to be innocent, till the time proven guilty, but at the same time, it cannot be believed that present bail petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case or that there are no chances that after being released on bail, present bail petitioner will not involve himself in offences pertaining to drug trafficking.

¶43

Co-accused in the present FIR namely Santosh Kumar, after being denied bail by this Court in CrMP(M) No. 2320/2024, vide order dated 6.11.2024, approached Hon'ble Apex Court vide SLP(Crl.) No. 18121/2024, which was disposed of on 4.2.2025, with a direction to learned Special Court to conclude trial within a period of one year, failing which, liberty has been granted to said co-accused to move Special Court for bail.

¶44

In view of the above facts viz. history of present bail petitioner, his conduct during trial in different cases, multiple

¶45

2025:HHC:42909

¶46

9

¶47

addresses of the present bail petitioner, direction passed by Hon'ble Apex Court to conclude the trial within one year i.e. February, 2026, this court does not consider it fit to grant bail to the bail petitioner and accordingly, same is declined. The bail application is accordingly dismissed.

¶48

December 09, 2025 Vikrant/Rajeev Raturi

¶49

(Sandeep Sharma), Judge

Sandeep Shah v. State of Hp

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sandeep Shah v. State of Hp

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Renu Devi Vs the State of Hp and Others

Inderjit Kaur and Others Vs the State of Hp and Others

Sulochna Kumari Vs State of Hp and Ors.

Deepika Sharma Vs the State of Hp and Others

Vijay Kumar Thakur and Another Vs the State of Hp and Others

Vinod Kumar Vs State of Hp and Ors.