Anoop Kumar Vs State of Hp — Narcotics (NDPS) | Himachal Pradesh HC (2026)

Anoop Kumar Vs State of Hp — Narcotics (NDPS) | Himachal Pradesh HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Delay of 8 days in filing the appeal condoned and application disposed of; appeal ordered registered (Cr. Appeal (C-SB) Filing No. 2203 of 2026); applicant/appellant released on bail on the principle of parity, if not required in any other case, subject to deposit of fine and furnishing personal and surety bond of Rs. 50,000/- within four weeks, undertaking to appear before the High Court as directed and to surrender before the Trial Court if the appeal is dismissed; bail bonds to be transmitted to the High Court and order communicated through FASTER.

Issue for consideration

Whether the delay of 8 days in filing the appeal by the incarcerated applicant/appellant should be condoned. +1 more

Court's answer

The delay of 8 days in filing the appeal is condoned: the averments in the supplementary affidavit show the applicant/appellant was unable to file the appeal because he was incarcerated, and his son had to arrange certified copies and file the appeal; the delay is therefore properly explained and the application is allowed.

Ratio / Principle

The applicant/appellant, lodged in jail, is released on bail on the principle of parity with the co-accused (already released), if not required in any other case, subject to deposit of fine and furnishing personal and surety bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court within four weeks, undertaking to appear before this Court as and when directed and to surrender before the learned Trial Court in case of dismissal of the appeal.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Himachal Pradesh (Rakesh Kainthla, Judge), order dated 5.6.2026 — In Cr. MP(M) No. 554 of 2026, the 8-day delay in filing the appeal by Anoop Kumar was condoned: a supplementary affidavit showed he was incarcerated and unable to pursue legal remedies, while his son was arranging certified copies of the judgments and orders and consulting counsel, so the delay was properly explained and the application allowed. Consequently, in Cr. Appeal (C-SB) Filing No. 2203 of 2026 the appeal was ordered registered, notice issued (waived by the Additional Advocate General for the respondent-State) and record requisitioned. In Cr.MP(ST) No. 2268 of 2026, noting that the applicant had been convicted by the learned Special Judge, Rohru, District Shimla, H.P (judgment and order dated 16.1.2026) under Section 21 read with Section 29 of the NDPS Act and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for five years, a fine of Rs. 20,000/- (default: simple imprisonment for one year) for possession of 15.15 grams of heroin, and that the co-accused had been released on 26.5.2026 in Cr.MP No. 874 of 2026 in Cr. Appeal (C-SB) No. 50 of 2026, the applicant was released on bail on the principle of parity, if not required in any other case, subject to deposit of fine and furnishing personal and surety bond of Rs. 50,000/- within four weeks, undertaking to appear before the Court as directed and to surrender before the Trial Court if the appeal is dismissed; bail bonds to be transmitted to the High Court, order sent through FASTER, and the matter listed with Cr. Appeal (C-SB) No. 50 of 2026.