Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2025 DIGILAW 282 (HP)

Naisha Arora v. State of Himachal Pradesh

2025-03-05

VIRENDER SINGH

body2025
JUDGMENT : Virender Singh, J. By way of the present application, filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘BNSS’), applicant-Naisha Arora has sought her release, on bail, during the pendency of the trial, in case FIR No.201 of 2024, dated 24.11.2024, registered under Sections 21, 29-61-85 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘NDPS Act’), with Police Station Kangra, District Kangra, H.P. 2. According to the applicant, she has falsely been implicated, in the present case and has been arrested by the police with allegedly possessing 5.30 gms of chitta/heroin and she has termed the case as false and connected one. 3. As per applicant, the investigation is complete and according to her, no useful purpose would be served by keeping her in the judicial custody, that too, for the indefinite period. 4. According to the applicant, she had earlier tried her luck by moving similar application, before the Court of learned Special Judge-I, Kangra at Dharamshala, District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh. However, the same was dismissed vide order dated 20.12.2024. 5. Apart from this, Mr. Jeevan Kumar, 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. 6. On the basis of the above facts, a prayer has been made to allow the bail application. 7. When, put to notice, the police has filed the status report, disclosing therein, that on 24.11.2024, HC Viraj Sharma (Investigating Officer), Police Station, Kangra, along with other police officials, was on patrolling duty, as well as, the duty to detect the crime, relating to excise and narcotics. 8. It is the further case of the police that at about 11:00 pm, at a place known as Ghat Purana Kangra, near Hanuman Temple, he has put the picketing to check the vehicles. When, he was checking vehicles No.HP01-DA-4506 and HP37-A-1250, then, he noticed that a car, being driven by its driver, came from Samela side, to which, he gave signal to stop. Consequently, the said vehicle was stopped on the left side of the road. The registration number of the vehicle was found to be HR21-R-1523 make Baleno. Apart from the driver, a lady was also found, sitting in the said car. 9. Consequently, the said vehicle was stopped on the left side of the road. The registration number of the vehicle was found to be HR21-R-1523 make Baleno. Apart from the driver, a lady was also found, sitting in the said car. 9. It is the further case of the police that thereafter, on enquiry, driver of the car disclosed his name as Sahil Sharma, whereas, the lady, sitting on the co-passenger seat, disclosed her name as Naisha Arora (applicant). Both of them have introduced themselves as a couple. Thereafter, the driver of the car was directed to show the requisite papers and also to open the boot of the vehicle for checking, upon which, driver, as well as, the said lady got perplexed and driver disclosed that they had obtained the vehicle on rent from Kharar (Punjab) and they could not show any requisite documents. 10. It is the further case of the police that when, the driver of the car shown his inability to produce any requisite documents, then, Investigating Officer developed suspicion upon them and in order to search the vehicle, he had called Suman Verma, Panch, Ward No.2, MC Kangra and Anil Kumar, R/o Old Kangra and requested them to come present at the spot, upon which, both of them reached at the spot. Both were associated in the investigation of the case. During the search of the vehicle, granule shaped substance was found, which, on checking, on drug detection kit, was found to be 5.30 grams of heroin/chitta and the same was taken into possession. Other codal formalities were completed. 11. After registration of the FIR, the police has arrested the accused persons. 12. The contraband, so recovered, was sent to SFSL, Junga, after complying with the provisions of Section 52A of the NDPS Act and after receiving positive report from there, the police has filed the chargesheet (challan), in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Kangra at Dharamshala (hereinafter referred to as the ‘trial Court’). 13. Lastly, it has been apprehended that in case, the applicant is released on bail, she may again indulge in similar activity. 14. On the basis of the above facts, a prayer has been made to dismiss the bail application. 15. Heard. 16. In this case, the contraband, allegedly stated to have been recovered, is 5.30 grams of heroin/chitta. 13. Lastly, it has been apprehended that in case, the applicant is released on bail, she may again indulge in similar activity. 14. On the basis of the above facts, a prayer has been made to dismiss the bail application. 15. Heard. 16. In this case, the contraband, allegedly stated to have been recovered, is 5.30 grams of heroin/chitta. Admittedly, the said contraband does not fall, within the definition of ‘commercial quantity’. As such, the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act are not applicable, in this case. 17. Once, it has been held that the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act are not applicable, in that eventuality, the presumption of innocence is still available to the applicant, as the bail application cannot be rejected merely as a matter of punishment, since, pre-trial punishment is prohibited under the law, as the punishment can be inflicted, after the conclusion of trial. 18. In the present case, investigation is complete and the police has submitted the challan, in the competent Court of law (learned trial Court). This fact is sufficient to demonstrate that the custodial interrogation of the applicant is no longer required by the police. 19. Moreover, the chances of commencement and conclusion of trial against the applicant, in near future, are not so bright. As such, she cannot be kept in judicial custody, that too, for the indefinite period. 20. Besides this, the age of the applicant, which, according to the status report, is 21 years and keeping the applicant in the judicial custody would also affect her future. 21. The Legislature, in its wisdom, has added the proviso to Section 480(ii) of BNSS, according to which, the Court may release a person on bail, if such person is a child or is a woman or is sick or infirm. 22. Except the present case, no other criminal history of the applicant has been mentioned in the status report, nor the same has been argued by learned Additional Advocate General, during the course of arguments. 23. Considering all these facts, this Court is of the view that the applicant is able to make out a case for her release, on bail, during the pendency of the trial. Hence, the present bail application is liable to be allowed and is accordingly allowed. 24. 23. Considering all these facts, this Court is of the view that the applicant is able to make out a case for her release, on bail, during the pendency of the trial. Hence, the present bail application is liable to be allowed and is accordingly allowed. 24. Consequently, the applicant is ordered to be released, on bail, in case FIR No.201 of 2024, dated 24.11.2024, registered under Sections 21, 29-61-85 of the NDPS Act, with Police Station Kangra, District Kangra, H.P., on her furnishing personal bonds in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with one surety of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. 25. This order, however, shall be subject to the following conditions:- a) The applicant shall make herself available for the purpose of interrogation, if so required 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; b) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence nor hamper the investigation of the case in any manner whatsoever; c) The applicant shall not make any inducement, threat or promises to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or the Police Officer, and d) The applicant shall not leave the territory of India without the prior permission of the Court. 26. 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. 27. 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. 28. The Registry is directed to forward a soft copy of the bail order to the Superintendent of District Jail, Dharamshala, District Kangra, H.P., through e-mail, with a direction to enter the date of grant of bail in the e-prison software. 29. In case, applicant is not released within a period of seven days, from the date of grant of bail, the Superintendent of District Jail, Dharamshala, District Kangra, H.P., is directed to inform this fact to the Secretary, DLSA, Kangra. 29. In case, applicant is not released within a period of seven days, from the date of grant of bail, the Superintendent of District Jail, Dharamshala, District Kangra, H.P., is directed to inform this fact to the Secretary, DLSA, Kangra. The Superintendent of District Jail, Dharamshala, District Kangra, H.P., is further directed that if the applicant fails to furnish the bail bonds, as per the order passed by this Court, within a period of one month from today, then, the said fact be submitted to this Court.