Liyakat Ali Vs State of Hp

2026:HHC:26573

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA.

Cr.MP (M) No.	: 911 of 2026
Decided on	: 3^rdJuly, 2026
Liyakat Ali	…Applicant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh	…Respondent

¶4

Coram

¶5

The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge.

¶6

Whether approved for reporting?¹

¶7

For the applicant : Mr. Vinod Kumar Soni, Legal Aid Counsel.
For the respondent : Mr. H.S. Rawat, Additional Advocate General with Ms. Ranjna Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General.

¶8

Virender Singh, Judge

¶9

Applicant–Liyakat Ali, has filed the present application, under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as the 'BNSS'), with a prayer to release him on bail, during the pendency of trial, arising out of FIR No. 32 of 2025, dated 28.2.2025, registered under Sections 22 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act

¶10

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

¶11

2 2026:HHC:26573

¶12

(hereinafter referred to as the ‘ND & PS’ Act), with Police Station, Majra, District Sirmour, H.P.

¶13

According to the applicant, he is innocent person and has falsely been implicated and arrested, in the above noted case, and has no concern, whatsoever, with the offence, for which, he has been arrested by the Police.

¶14

As per the applicant, investigation, in the present case, is complete and Chargesheet has been filed in the learned trial Court. As such, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the applicant in the judicial custody, that too, for indefinite period.

¶15

It is the further case of the applicant that the trial of the case will take sufficient long time for its conclusion and his custody would be nothing, but, pretrial punishment.

¶16

The relief of bail has also been sought on the ground that his coaccused Sajid Ali, has already been released on bail by this Court, while deciding Cr.MP(M) No. 1192 of 2025. It has also been impressed upon this Court that the role attributed to the applicant is similar to the role attributed to accused Sajid Ali.

¶17

3 2026:HHC:26573

¶18

The applicant has tried his luck by moving similar application, before the learned Special JudgeII, Nahan, District Sirmaur, H.P., however, the same has been dismissed, vide order dated 24.09.2025.

¶19

Apart from this, the applicant has given certain undertakings, for which, he is ready to abide by, in case, ordered to be released on bail, during the pendency of the trial.

¶20

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

¶21

When, put to notice, the Police has filed the status report, disclosing therein, that on 27.2.2025, ASI Aashish Kumar, alongwith other police officials, was on patrolling duty and mining checking, within the jurisdiction of Police Station, Majra. After conducting patrolling, when ASI Aashish Kumar, alongwith other police officials, was on his way back to the Police Station, then, at about 8:00 p.m., they noticed a motorcycle coming from opposite direction near Pipliwala Jodo. On seeing the Police vehicle, the motorcyclist tried to move towards jungle. His activities raised suspicion in the mind of the

¶22

4

¶23

2026:HHC:26573

¶24

I.O., as such, he directed the driver of their vehicle to stop. Thereafter, HC Kuldeep Kumar and HASI Rajinder Singh nabbed the motorcyclist.

¶25

9.1. On inquiry, the motorcyclist disclosed his name as Liyakat Ali S/o Shibudeen, R/o Jagatpur, Tehsil Paonta Sahib. On seeing the police party, Liyakat Ali (applicant) seemed to be perplexed. The registration number of the motorcycle was found to be HP17E0224. The process of nabbing and checking the registration number of motorcycle was videographed by ASI Asheesh Kumar.

¶26

9.2. Since, the I.O. developed the suspicion that said Liyakat Ali (applicant) might be having some suspicious narcotic substance, as such, he requested to send someone from the Police Station, alongwith electronic weighing scale and chargeable printer.

¶27

9.3. Thereafter, Sabar Ali, Pradhan of Gram Panchayat, Meliyo was telephonically requested to come to the spot at about 8:45 p.m. HASI Sunil Kumar, reached from Police Station, Majra, alongwith the articles, so requisitioned.

¶28

5

¶29

2026:HHC:26573

¶30

9.4. After sometime, Pradhan Sabar Ali also reached there, who was apprised about the factual position. Since, it was forest area, and no independent witnesses could be found, as such, Sabar Ali and HC Kuldeep Kumar were associated as independent witnesses. Thereafter, I.O., as well as, police officials had given their personal search, and nothing incriminating was found.

¶31

9.5. As per the further stand of the Police, motorcycle of applicant Liyakat Ali was searched. On checking the motorcycle, underneath the petrol tank, when the tool kit was opened, the same was found containing two light white coloured polythene envelopes.

¶32

9.6. On opening the same, maroon coloured capsules were found, upon which, words ‘Anti Spasmodic’, were written, which were found to be prohibited capsules. Applicant Liyakat Ali could not produce any permit or prescription slip, for carrying or possessing those capsules, nor he could give any satisfactory answer to the I.O.

¶33

9.7. On counting, these capsules were found to be 230 in number. In another envelope, 231 capsules were found. These capsules were taken into possession, along

¶34

6

¶35

2026:HHC:26573

¶36

with motorcycle. Other codal formalities were completed. Ruqua was sent for registration of the FIR, upon which, FIR was registered. Thereafter, statements of witnesses, under Section 180 of BNSS were recorded.

¶37

9.8. Since, I.O. could not identify the substance, as such, applicant Liyakat Ali was bound down by serving notice under Section 35 (5) of BNSS, upon him. The case property was got resealed by producing the same, before the SHO of the Police Station. Thereafter, proceedings under Section 52(A) were got conducted and the case property was sent to SFSL, Junga.

¶38

9.9. On 22.3.2025, result from the SFSL, Junga was

¶39

received. The operative portion of the SFSL report, as mentioned in the status report, is reproduced as under:

¶40

Exhibit No. 1: Maroon Coloured Capsules Description: Maroon coloured shell of capsules (Anti Spasmodic imprinted on capsule shells) containing white powder. Total Capsules = 230 Total weight of capsules = 130.640 g Total weight of powder = 107.870 g

¶41

The white coloured knotted poly bag marked as B was opened and transparent interlock poly packet found containing the following exhibit.

¶42

Exhibit No. : MAROON COLORED CAPSULES Description: Maroon coloured shell of capsules (ANTI SPASMODIC imprinted on capsule shells) containing white powder.

¶43

7

¶44

7	2026:HHC:26573
Total Capsules =	231
Total weight of capsules=	131.208 g
Total weight of powder=	108.339 g

¶45

Laboratory Examination & Result

¶46

The representative samples (12.0 g powder in A & 12.0 g powder in B) from the exhibits Maroon coloured Capsules (stated to be capsules of ANTI SPASMODIC) in poly bags marked as A & B were taken ou and homogenized. The homogeneous samples were analyzed using physical, chemical chromatographic (TLC), and instrumentation (GCMS) methods. The analysis revealed the presence of Tramadol in both the exhibits. The result thus obtained is given below. The Exhibits Maroon Colored Capsules (stated to be capsules fo ANTI SPASMODIC) in poly bags marked as A & B are samples of Tramadol capsules .

¶47

9.10. It is the further case of the Police that as per the report of the SFSL, Junga, recovered capsules were found to be prohibited substance ‘Tramadol’, as such, accused Liyakat Ali was arrested.

¶48

9.11. According to the further stand of the Police, applicant Liyakat Ali has got identified the house of accused Sajid Ali and disclosed that on 28.2.2025, accused Sajid Ali had called him to his house and handed over the capsules and motorcycle No. HP17E0244 to him directing him to deliver the envelope containing capsules to a person at Surajpur.

¶49

8

¶50

2026:HHC:26573

¶51

9.12. Consequently, accused Sajid Ali was arrested, under Section 29 of the NDPS Act and he was medico legally examined. Thereafter, applicant Liyakat Ali and accued Sajid Ali were produced before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Nahan, from where, they were remanded to Police custody, till 25.3.2025. Thereafter, they were remanded to judicial custody.

¶52

9.13. Lastly, it has been stated that total weight of contraband is 261.848 grams, which, as per the status report, falls within the definition of ‘commercial quantity’. Charge sheet is stated to have been prepared, which has been submitted in the competent Court of law.

¶53

9.14. In the status report, it has been pleaded that on 27.2.2025, accused Sajid Ali, at about 5:15 p.m. from his mobile phone No. 7018503574 called his coaccused Liyakat Ali (applicant) on his mobile Number 9317081031 and called him to his house. Thereafter, accused Sajid Ali is stated to have handed over the envelope containing capsules and his motorcycle, alongwith its keys, with a request to deliver the said envelope to one Pahadi at Surajpur. Thereafter, applicant Liyakat Ali is stated to have

¶54

9 2026:HHC:26573

¶55

concealed those envelopes in the tool kit. Thereafter, he was nabbed by the Police, alongwith the capsules.

¶56

9.15. In the status report, Police had taken the plea that CDRs and Customer Application Forms of mobile phone numbers 7018503574 (mobile phone number of accused Sajid Ali), and 9317081031 (mobile phone number of applicant Liyakat Ali) were obtained from the Service Provider. As per the Customer Application Forms, mobile number 7018503574 was found to be registered in the name of accused Sajid Ali, whereas, mobile number 9317081031 was found to be registered in the name of Liyakat Ali (applicant).

¶57

9.16. As per the CDRs, on 27.2.2025, accused Sajid Ali and applicant Liyakat Ali, were found to have talked to each other, during day time, as well as, during night hours. In this regard, page Nos. 97 and 116 of the CDRs have been relied upon by the Police.

¶58

9.17. The Police has reasserted the fact that on 22.03.2025, applicant Liyakat Ali has got identified the place of accused Sajid Ali, in Jagatpur and disclosed that at his house, accused Sajid Ali has handed over the

¶59

10

¶60

2026:HHC:26573

¶61

capsules, which were recovered by the Police. The said house is found to be in the ownership of accused Sajid Ali. Motorcycle No HP 17E0244 is also found to be registered in the name of accused Sajid Ali.

¶62

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

¶63

Heard.

¶64

It has been argued by Mr. Vinod Kumar Soni, learned Legal Aid Counsel, that the contraband allegedly recovered, in the present case, does not fall within the definition of ‘commercial quantity’.

¶65

To buttress his contentions, he has pointed out the contents of the status report, in which, report of SFSL, has been reproduced. As per the report of SFSL, Junga, from Exhibit No.1, total 230 capsules were found and total weight of the capsules was 130.640 grams, whereas, from other exhibit 231 capsules were found and the total weight of capsules was found 131.208.339 grams.

¶66

The said arguments of the learned counsel for the applicant do not hold water, as, in view of the decision of Full Bench of this Court in State of Himachal Pradesh

¶67

11

¶68

2026:HHC:26573

¶69

versus Mehboob Khan, 2013 (3) Him.L.R. (FB) 1834 ), the entire contraband is to be considered, as ‘manufacturing drugs’.

¶70

Learned counsel for the applicant has also argued that the applicant is also entitled to the relief on the ground of parity, as, coaccused of the applicant Sajid Ali, has already been released on bail by this Court while deciding Cr.MP(M) No. 1192 of 2025.

¶71

The role attributed to accused Sajid Ali is altogether different from that of the applicant, as, according to the stand taken by the Police, the role, which has been attributed to accused Sajid Ali, has been found on the basis of the alleged revelation/disclosure made by the applicant, during police custody, whereas, the applicant, as per the police case, was found carrying two polythene envelopes, in a motorcycle, bearing registration No.HP17E0224, being driven by him and was nabbed along with the contraband on the spot. As such, it cannot be held that the applicant is entitled to the relief on the ground of parity.

¶72

12

¶73

2026:HHC:26573

¶74

It is no longer res integra that before releasing a person, involved in the crime, it is obligatory upon the Court to record the findings, which should be more than prima facie findings, regarding existence of the twin conditions, as enumerated under Section 37(b)(ii) of the NDPS Act. In other words, it can be said that before releasing the person, involved in the crime in issue, findings have to be recorded by the Court, about the fact that accused is not guilty of such offence, and while on bail, he is not likely to commit such offence.

¶75

Considering all these facts, there is nothing on the record, on the basis of which, it can be said, at this stage, that the applicant is not guilty of such offence and while on bail, he is not likely to commit any offence. As such, no case to pass any order in favour of the applicant, under Section 483 BNSS, is made out, at this stage. Consequently, the bail application of the applicant is dismissed.

¶76

Any of the observations, made herein above, shall not be taken as an expression of opinion, on the

¶77

13 2026:HHC:26573

¶78

merits of the case, as these observations, are confined, only, to the disposal of the present bail application.

¶79

( Virender Singh ) Judge

¶80

July 03, 2026 (ps)

Liyakat Ali v. State of Hp

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Liyakat Ali v. State of Hp

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nagesh Vs State of Hp

Kamla Devi and Another Vs Pankaj Sublaick and Others

National Insurance Company Limited. Vs Smt. Indu Thakur

Sarita Devi and Others Vs Mukhtiaro Devi and Others

Ayush Soni Vs State of Hp

Rahul Kumar Alias Happy Vs State of Hp