JUDGMENT : Chander Bhusan Barowalia, J. The present bail application has been maintained by the petitioner under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking his release in case FIR No. 21 of 2017, dated 08.03.2017, under Section 15 of Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, registered at Police Station Kot Kehloor, District Bilaspur, H.P. 2. As per the petitioner, he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He is resident of the place and neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice, so he may be released on bail. 3. Police report stands filed. As per the prosecution, on 08.03.2017, around 02:15 p.m., when a police party was on patrol duty near the Office of Gram Panchayat, Majari, they received a secret information that the petitioner is involved in selling poppy husk and he is operating from his residence. Acting upon the tip off, the police raided the residence of the petitioner in his presence. During the search, a bag was recovered, which contained poppy husk. The recovered contraband was weighed in the Kiryana shop of the petitioner, which was found 12.5 kgs. The police completed all the codal formalities. The statements of the witnesses were recorded and the accused was arrested on 08.03.2017, at 07:15 p.m. Sample, separated from the recovered contraband, was sent for chemical analysis and as per the report received from SFSL, the recovered contraband contained poppy husk. As per the prosecution, the petitioner had been dealing with the contraband since long and earlier some cases of NDPS have also been registered against him. Lastly, the prosecution has prayed that the petitioner is habitual offender and he is likely to tamper with the prosecution evidence, therefore, the present bail application may be dismissed. 4. Heard. The learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner stands acquitted in other cases and the quantity recovered from him, in the present case, is not a commercial quantity, so keeping in view the above submissions, he may be released on bail. Conversely, the learned Additional Advocate General, has argued that taking into consideration the conduct of the petitioner and his past history, he may not be released on bail. Conversely, the learned Additional Advocate General, has argued that taking into consideration the conduct of the petitioner and his past history, he may not be released on bail. In rebuttal, the learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner has already been acquitted in earlier cases, meaning thereby he was not involved in those cases. He has further argued that in order to meet the ends of justice, the petitioner may be released on bail. 5. I have gone through the rival contentions of the parties and the police report in detail. 6. In the present case, the police acting on a secret information that the petitioner is dealing in poppy husk, recovered 12.5 kgs of poppy husk from his possession. The petitioner was apprehended and the recoveries were effected. At this stage, this Court finds that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the petitioner was involved in the offence and he is likely to repeat the same in future, in case he is enlarged on bail. At the same point of time there is likelihood of petitioner’s fleeing from justice and there are chances that he may tamper with the prosecution evidence. This Court, after taking into consideration the manner and the nature in which the offence has been committed, behaviour of the petitioner and the quantity of the recovered contraband, i.e., 12.5 kgs, and also the interest of the society at large, finds that the present is not a fit case where the judicial discretion to admit the petitioner on bail is required to be exercised in his favour. 7. In view of what has been discussed hereinabove, the petition, which sans merits, deserves dismissal and is accordingly dismissed.