2026:HHC:2483
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Cr.MP (M) Nos. : 1932, 2190, 2651
and 2775 of 2025
Reserved on : 05
th
January, 2026
Decided on : 08
th
January, 2026
1. Cr.MP (M) No.1932 of 2025
Shahi Mahatma …Applicant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh …Respondent
2. Cr.MP (M) No.2190 of 2025
Nishant Chauhan …Applicant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh …Respondent
3. Cr.MP(M) No.2651 of 2025
Deepak Sharma …Applicant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh …Respondent
4. Cr.MP(M) No.2775 of 2025
Hitesh Thakur …Applicant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh …Respondent
2 2026:HHC:2483
Coram
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?
1
For the applicant(s) : Mr. Ashok Sharma, Senior Advocate
with Mr. Vinod Chauhan, Advocate,
Mr. Aditya Kaushal, Mr. Abhimanyu
Thakur & Mr. S.D. Gill, Advocates.
For the respondent :Mr. Tejasvi Sharma, Additional
Advocate General, with Mr. Rohit
Sharma and Ms. Ranjna Patial,
Deputy Advocates General.
Virender Singh, Judge
The above titled four applications are being
decided by the common order, as, the applicants have filed
these applications, under Section 483 of the Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as
the 'BNSS'), with a prayer to release them on bail, during
the pendency of trial, in case FIR No.50 of 2024, dated
19.09.2024, registered, under Sections 21 and 29 of the
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985
(hereinafter referred to as the ‘NDPS Act’), with Police
Station Kotkhai, District Shimla, H.P.
1
Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes.
3 2026:HHC:2483
2. According to the applicants, they are innocent
and have falsely been implicated, in the above noted case.
3. As per the applicants, the contraband has not
been recovered from their possession and the learned trial
Court, at the time of consideration of charge, has
discharged the applicants from the offence punishable
under Section 27A of the NDPS Act and Section 111 of the
BNS.
4. It is the further case of the applicants that it is
well settled that where the foundational charges of
conspiracy and financing, under Section 27A of the NDPS
Act, do not survive, the rigors of Section 37 NDPS Act,
must be assessed, in the light of the actual remaining
allegations.
5. According to the applicants, they have been
implicated, in the present case, on the basis of the
disclosure statement, confessional statement or on the
basis of the financial transactions. According to them, they
are not having any criminal history.
6. The applicants had also earlier tried their luck
by moving similar applications, before the learned trial
4 2026:HHC:2483
Court, as well as, before this Court, however, their
applications have been dismissed.
7. The applicants have given certain undertakings,
for which, they are ready to abide by, in case, they are
ordered to be released on bail, during the pendency of trial.
8. On the basis of the above facts, learned counsel
appearing for the applicants, have prayed that the
applicants are also entitled to the relief of bail, as, their co
accused, have already been released on bail, by the Court
of learned Special JudgeI, Shimla.
9. In addition to this, learned Senior counsel has
also relied upon the decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme
Court in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) Nos.16642 of
2023, titled as Shince Babu versus The State of Kerala
& Another and Criminal Appeal No.4690 of 2025 , titled
as Mangal Yadav versus State of Utter Pradesh, and has
prayed that the application may kindly be allowed.
10. Applicant Hitesh Thakur, was earlier released
on bail, by the Court of learned Special JudgeI, Shimla,
vide order dated 01.01.2025, however, he could not put
appearance before the learned trial Court, as such, his
5 2026:HHC:2483
personal and surety bonds were ordered to be cancelled
and he was remanded to the judicial custody. Thereafter,
he has again moved an application before the Court of
learned Special JudgeI, Shimla, however, his application
has been dismissed, vide order dated 13.11.2025. Now, he
is before this Court, seeking the relief of bail.
11. When put to notice, the police has filed the
status report, disclosing therein, that on 18.09.2024, SI
Mehar Chand, I.O. ANTF(FU) CID, along with other police
official, left the office in official vehicle, bearing registration
No.HP03C5663, for patrolling duty and duty to detect the
crime relating to narcotics, towards Dhalli, Theog, Kotkhai,
Jubbal, and Kharapathar.
11.1. When, the I.O., along with other police official,
was present at a place known as Kharapathar, then, he
received a secret information regarding the fact that
Muddasir Ahmad Mochi, son of Shri Mohammad Makbool,
village Bhatpura, Post Office Sunitpura, Tehsil Karolpura,
District Kupwara, Jammu and Kashmir, is travelling in
taxi No.HP01A5028, from Shimla to Rohru and he was
having large quantity of Chitta/Heroin with him.
6 2026:HHC:2483
11.2. As per the information, he was going to Rohru,
in order to sell the same to someone and in case, the said
vehicle is intercepted and the bag of Muddasir Ahmad
Mochi is searched, then, large quantity of Chitta could be
recovered.
11.3. The said information was found to be authentic
and reliable. As per the I.O., due to paucity of time, in
case, he would have obtained search warrants, in that
situation, the possibility of removal of the contraband was
there. As such, the I.O. complied with the provisions of
Section 42(2) of the NDPS Act and submitted the report to
his superior.
11.4. Thereafter, the I.O. put picketing at a place
between Kotkhai Kharapathar and contacted Up Pradhan,
Gram Panchayat, Darkoti Ramesh Chauhan on telephone.
After sometime, Ramesh Chauhan and Ravinder Chauhan,
reached at the spot. They were apprised about the secret
information and associated in the raiding party, as
independent witnesses.
11.5. It has also been mentioned in the status report
that at about 8.55 p.m., as per the information, taxi
7 2026:HHC:2483
No.HP01A5028, being driven by its driver, reached on the
spot from Kotkhai side. With the help of police officials,
the said vehicle was got stopped on the side of the road
and the driver and the person, sitting on the rear seat,
were apprised about the secret information.
11.6. On inquiry, the driver disclosed his name as
Deepan Lal and the person, sitting on the rear seat,
disclosed his name as Muddasir Ahmad Mochi. Thereafter,
the bag, which Muddasir Ahmad Mochi was carrying, was
searched, along with vehicle. From the bag, as well as,
from the vehicle, nothing incriminating was found. This
fact, was documented.
11.7. Thereafter, the option, as per Section 50 was
given to the driver, as well as, Muddasir Ahmad Mochi,
upon which, both of them had opted to give their search to
the gazetted police officer. Thereafter, at about 12.20 a.m.,
Dy. S.P. Sidharth Sharma, SDPO, Theog, was requested to
come to the spot, upon which, he had reached at the spot
at 1.25 a.m. Meanwhile, Constable Vikrant reached at the
spot, along with the receipt of the information, under
Section 42(2) of the NDPS Act.
8 2026:HHC:2483
11.8. Thereafter, SDPO had inquired from Deepan Lal
and Muddasir Ahmad Mochi and oral direction was given
to SI Mehar Chand to search Muddasir Ahmad Mochi.
During search, from the underwear of accused Muddasir
Ahmad Mochi, a black coloured plastic envelope was
found, which, on opening, was found to be containing
468.380 grams of Chitta/Heroin.
11.9. Apart from this, currency notes of Rs.2530/
and Aadhar Card were also found, which were taken into
possession. In the personal search of Deepan Lal, nothing
incriminating was found. The entire process was
photographed and videographed on the spot. As such
Rukka was sent to the Police Station, for registration of the
FIR, upon which, FIR, in question was registered.
11.10. Thereafter, SI Mehar Chand, submitted the
photocopy of the information, under Section 42(2) of the
NDPS Act, memo regarding personal search of the raiding
party and official vehicle, along with carbon copy, search
memo of Taxi No.HP01A5028 and personal bag, along
with carbon copy, consent memo, under Section 50 of the
NDPS Act, of accused Muddasir Ahmad Mochi and Dipan
9 2026:HHC:2483
Lal, along with carbon copy, memo regarding recovery of
468.380 grams of Chitta/Heroin, memo regarding personal
search of driver Deepan Lal, along with carbon copy,
Mobile phone marka ‘Redmi’ of accused Muddasir Ahmad
Mochi, by virtue of which, taxi No.HP01A5028 Alto 800,
along with documents, was taken into possession, along
with carbon copy, photocopy of Rukka, parcel of case
property, containing 468.380 grams of Chitta/Heroin,
along with specimen seal having impression ‘M’, one cloth
parcel containing currency notes of Rs.2530/ along with
specimen seal, zimini No.1, along with carbon copy, NCBI
form in triplicate, along with carbon copy, Form No.1
duplicate, along with carbon copy, and other documents,
before the Incharge, Police Station, Kotkhai.
11.11. The statements of the witnesses were recorded,
under Section 180 of the BNSS. Thereafter, accused
Muddasir Ahmad Mochi was interrogated and was arrested
on 19.09.2024, at about 2.30 a.m. Thereafter, the case
property was deposited with MHC Police Station, Kotkhai
and the accused was medicolegally examined.
10 2026:HHC:2483
11.12. During investigation, the accused disclosed that
he is in the business of selling Chitta/Heroin, as they are
members of interstate gang, along with Shahi Mahatma.
He has further deposed that he, in connivance with
Pradeep Ranta @ Pankaj Ranta, used to bring Chitta from
Delhi and give the same to Shahi Mahatma, whereas,
Shahi Mahatma, through peddlers, used to sell the same in
the Rohru area. Sometimes, peddlers used to take Chitta
from the house of Shahi Mahatma at Pinjore. According to
him, Shahi Mahatma is doing the business from the said
house/room.
11.13. Muddasir Ahmad Mochi has also disclosed that
accused Shahi Mahatma, through mobile phone location
used to sell Chitta to the intended purchaser. Shahi
Mahatma has purchased Sim card, in the name of
Muddasir Ahmad Mochi, and after using his Aadhar Card
and Pan Card, got opened 23 Bank accounts in Kashmir
and used to receive money, in those Bank accounts.
Accused Muddasir Ahmad Mochi sometimes through
cheques and sometimes through cash used to withdraw
the same, and pay the said amount to Pradeep Ranta.
11 2026:HHC:2483
11.14. Accused Muddasir Ahmad Mochi, had also
facilitated the contact of Shahi Mahatma with the
smugglers in Kashmir and they were now planning to bring
Chitta from Kashmir. On 19.09.2024, SDPO, constituted a
SIT by deputing SHO Police Station, Theog as incharge of
the SIT.
11.15. It is the further case of the police, as
mentioned, in the status report, that on 20.09.2024,
Muddasir Ahmad Mochi, was produced before the Court of
JMFC Chopal, Camp at Theog, from where, he was
remanded to police custody. Inventory of the case property
was got prepared by producing the same before the Court
of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Chopal and
samples were sent to SFSL Junga, whereas, the remaining
case property was deposited with District Malkhana,
Kaithu. On 20.09.2024, SIT incharge, Inspector Jaswant
Singh associated Shahi Mahatma, in the investigation and
he was arrested on 11.50 p.m. on that day.
11.16. During investigation, Shahi Mahatma has
disclosed that from the last 8 months, he is in the business
of selling Chitta. Harinder Manta and Pradeep Kumar @
12 2026:HHC:2483
Pankaj Ranta are also involved in the business of
distribution of Chitta and Muddasir Ahmad Mochi, is
known to him for the last 5 years and all are in this
business. Accused Muddasir Ahmad Mochi and Pradeep
Kumar @ Pankaj Ranta, used to purchase Chitta
sometimes from Delhi and sometimes from Karnal, and
hand over the same to him in his room at Pinjore, from
where, Muddasir Ahmad Mochi, used to supply the Chitta
at Rohru. Thereafter, he used to place the Chitta at
different locations and from those locations, he used to
further pass on to Rakesh @ Tinu, resident of Seema
(Badali), Sarthak Sood resident of Rohru, Ravinder (Motta),
Naresh resident of Bijori, Neeraj resident of Melthi and
Ashu (Aate) resident of Rohru.
11.17. The above persons, according to Shahi
Mahatma, after receiving the Chitta from different
locations, used to separate the same in small packets and
sell the same further to other persons. The persons, who
used to purchase Chitta, used to contact him and transfer
the amount in the bank account of Muddasir, which he
had got opened in Srinagar (J&K). According to him, earlier
13 2026:HHC:2483
he had used his Dhanlaxmi bank account opened with
Punjab National Bank and now he is using the bank
accounts opened in the name of Muddasir Ahmad Mochi.
11.18. Shahi Mahatma, with the help of Harinder
Manta and Pradeep Kumar @ Pankaj Ranta, has made a
syndicate and they work, as drug peddlers and supply the
same to different locations. In lieu of that, they used to
give free Chitta to all the peddlers, for their consumption.
Shahi Mahatma had also talked to the drugs smugglers of
Kashmir; namely Mushtaq and Javed.
11.19. On 21.09.2024, accused Shahi Mahatma
(applicant), was produced before the Court, from where, he
was remanded to police custody.
11.20. It has been mentioned, in the status report,
that on 20.09.2024, mobile phone of Muddasir Ahmad
Mochi, was sent to SFSL Junga. On 23.09.2024, mobile
phones of Shahi Mahatma and his wife were also taken
into possession. Thereafter, those were sent to SFSL
Junga. Result regarding mobile phone of Muddasir Ahmad
Mochi, has been received. Service provider has been
14 2026:HHC:2483
requested to provide the CDRs of mobile phones of
Muddasir Ahmad Mochi, and Shahi Mahatma (applicant).
11.21. Thereafter, bank statements of accused
Muddasir Ahmad Mochi and Shahi Mahatma (applicant),
were obtained. Perusal of the same shows that there are
transactions of crores of rupees in the bank accounts of
above two accused persons. Shahi Mahatma (applicant), is
using his vehicle, bearing registration HP10C1425, and
after receiving the information regarding arrest of accused
Muddasir Ahmad Mochi, on 19.09.2024, accused Shahi
Mahatma, along with his companion Pankaj Ranta, had
tried to flee away, in the said vehicle. Pankaj Ranta
succeeded in fleeing away, whereas, accused Shahi
Mahatma was arrested by RPF.
11.22. On 16.10.2024, accused Harinder Manta, was
arrested, who, on inquiry, disclosed that he is in the habit
of consuming Chitta from the year 2020 and earlier, he
used to get Chitta from his friends, but, thereafter, he is
purchasing the same from Delhi. In the year 2022, Solan
police had arrested him for allegedly possessing 150 grams
Chitta. Again, in the year 2023, he has been arrested by
15 2026:HHC:2483
the Police, along with Chitta. Thereafter, in the month of
January/February, he has contacted Shahi Mahatma for
purchasing Chitta, upon which, Shahi Mahatma, used to
provide Chitta in Rohru.
11.23. Accused Harinder Manta, used to transfer the
amount in the Bank account of Shahi Mahatma,
maintained in ICICI Bank. Thereafter, Shahi Mahatma,
used to forward him the location, from where, he used to
lift Chitta. Thereafter, accused Shahi Mahatma had
allured him to join the business of Chitta. The said offer
was accepted and he had also joined the said business,
thereafter.
11.24. Accused Harinder Manta used to purchase
Chitta from Delhi from Nigerian national and on the
directions of Shahi Mahatma, he used to keep Chitta at a
particular location and in lieu of that, amount was paid to
him in cash. In the month of March, 2024, amount was
transferred online, but, mostly, he used to get amount in
cash. In the month of March, 2024, he had purchased 100
grams Chitta on three occasions and sold the same in the
16 2026:HHC:2483
area through Shahi Mahatma. On the basis of above facts,
accused Harinder Manta was arrested.
11.25. Thereafter, the police had obtained the
statement of bank account No.048701503074 maintained
by Harinder Manta with ICICI Bank Rohru. Perusal of the
same shows that accused Harinder Manta, from his bank
account had transferred a sum of Rs.21,500/ to the bank
account of Shahi Mahatma, maintained with Mangal Das &
Sons. During investigation, it has been found that accused
Arvind Chauhan, has transferred a sum of Rs.1,65,000/,
in the bank account of Harinder Manta, from 18.07.2023
to 11.09.2024.
11.26. Similarly, accused Naresh had transferred a
sum of Rs.14,000/ from 05.03.2024 to 12.09.2024, in the
bank account of Harinder Manta. Apart from this, there is
withdrawal of Rs.36,69,010/ and deposit of
Rs.36,67,942/ in the bank account of Harinder Manta.
11.27. On analysis of the statement of account of
accused Shahi Mahatma and Muddasir Ahmad Mochi, it
was found that there were transactions of lacs of rupees in
17 2026:HHC:2483
the bank account of Shahi Mahatma, maintained with ASP
International Bank.
11.28. Thereafter, bank account statements of Shahi
Mahatma, maintained with ASP International Bank were
obtained and it was found that Deepak Sharma (applicant)
has made transactions from his bank account, which is
linked with mobile No.9317112131.
11.29. As per the said statement, on 22.05.2024,
Deepak Sharma (applicant), has transferred a sum of
Rs.1000/; on 22.05.2024, a sum of Rs.1000/; on
22.05.2024, a sum of Rs.700/; on 23.05.2024, a sum of
Rs.1000/; on 23.05.2024, a sum of Rs.1000/; on
23.05.2024, a sum of Rs.1000/; on 31.05.2024, a sum of
Rs.1000/; on 31.05.2024, a sum of Rs.1000/; on
01.06.2024, a sum of Rs.1000/; on 01.06.2024, a sum of
Rs.1000/; on 02.06.2024, a sum of Rs.1000/; on
02.06.2024, a sum of Rs.800/; on 02.06.2024, a sum of
Rs.1000/; on 04.06.2024, a sum of Rs.1000/; and on
04.06.2024, a sum of Rs.500/. Thus, a total sum of
Rs.15,000/ was credited in his account.
18 2026:HHC:2483
11.30. Apart from this, in the bank account of Shahi
Mahatma, maintained with Mangal Dass & Sons, there are
transactions of Rs.5600/ on 11.09.2024 and in the Bank
account No.7541002100001139, maintained with ASP
International Bank, on 21.02.2024, Deepak Sharma has
transferred a sum of Rs.600/; on 21.02.2024, a sum of
Rs.400/; on 14.03.2024, a sum of Rs.2000/; on
17.04.2024, a sum of Rs.3300/; on 19.04.2024, a sum of
Rs.3300/; on 21.04.2024, a sum of Rs.3200/; on
21.04.2024, a sum of Rs.2900/; on 21.04.2024, a sum of
Rs.300/; on 22.04.2024, a sum of Rs.1000/; on
22.04.2024, a sum of Rs.1000/; on 22.04.2024, a sum of
Rs.900/; on 22.04.2024, a sum of Rs.80/; on
02.05.2024, a sum of Rs.1000/; on 02.05.2024, a sum of
Rs.1000/; on 02.05.2024, a sum of Rs.1000/; on
02.05.2024, a sum of Rs.1000/; on 05.05.2024, a sum of
Rs.1000/; on 05.05.2024, a sum of Rs.1000/; on
05.05.2024, a sum of Rs.200/; on 13.05.2024, a sum of
Rs.1000/; on 13.05.2024, a sum of Rs.1000/; on
13.05.2024, a sum of Rs.800/; on 13.05.2024, a sum of
Rs.200/; on 17.05.2024, a sum of Rs.1000/; on
19 2026:HHC:2483
17.05.2024, a sum of Rs.1000/; on 17.05.2024, a sum of
Rs.1000/; and on 20.05.2024, a sum of Rs.1500/. Thus,
he has made total transactions worth Rs.32,680/.
11.31. It is the further case of the Police that accused
Deepak Sharma (applicant), had made a transaction of
Rs.5870/ in the bank account of Muddasir Ahmad Mochi,
maintained with Axis Bank, as such, there is total
transaction of Rs.59,150/.
11.32. On 14.01.2025, accused Deepak Sharma
(applicant) was associated, who has disclosed that he is
consuming Chitta from the year 2024. Initially, when, he
has started consuming Chitta, he used to purchase the
same from local boys; namely Naresh Kumar, Ankush.
Thereafter, with his friends and other boys of the area, he
had started purchasing Chitta, for further sale about one
year ago. Naresh, resident of Rohru, has disclosed to him
about the involvement of Shahi Mahatma. Thereafter, he
has started purchasing Chitta, from Shahi Mahatma.
11.33. It has also been mentioned, in the status report,
that in the Bank account of applicant Deepak Sharma,
there were transactions, from the account of accused
20 2026:HHC:2483
Purskrit Verma, of a sum of Rs.900/ on 13.10.2023, a
sum of Rs.900/ on 13.10.2023, a sum of Rs.900/ on
15.10.2023, a sum of Rs.900/ on 16.10.2023, a sum of
Rs.900/ on 31.10.2023, a sum of Rs.900/ on
01.11.2023, a sum of Rs.1000/ on 09.12.2023, a sum of
Rs.400/ on 11.12.2023, a sum of Rs.1100/ on
14.12.2023, a sum of Rs.1000/ on 19.12.2023, a sum of
Rs.700/ on 20.12.2023, a sum of Rs.400/ on
13.10.2023, a sum of Rs.900/ on 04.01.2024, a sum of
Rs.900/ on 11.01.2024, a sum of Rs.370/ on
13.01.2024, a sum of Rs.200/ on 13.01.2024, a sum of
Rs.1200/ on 08.02.2024, a sum of Rs.800/ on
16.02.2024, a sum of Rs.300/ on 24.02.2024, a sum of
Rs.100/ on 24.02.2024, a sum of Rs.400/ on
26.02.2024, a sum of Rs.200/ on 29.03.2024, a sum of
Rs.1000/ on 10.05.2024, a sum of Rs.1000/ on
10.08.2024, a sum of Rs.1800/ on 12.08.2024, a sum of
Rs.700/ on 14.08.2024, and a sum of Rs.900/ on
24.08.2024.
11.34. It has further been mentioned in the status
report that accused Jatin Thakur, has transferred a sum of
21 2026:HHC:2483
Rs.678/ on 26.08.2024, a sum of Rs.600/ on
24.09.2024, and a sum of Rs.2580/ on 25.09.2024.
Thus, he has transferred a total sum of Rs.3858/.
11.35. Accused Mohit Thakur, has transferred a sum
of Rs.300/ on 07.08.2024, a sum of Rs.1500/ on
09.08.2024, a sum of Rs.300/ on 09.08.2024, a sum of
Rs.1000/ on 11.08.2024, and a sum of Rs.500/ on
11.08.2024. Thus, he has transferred a total sum of
Rs.3600/.
11.36. Similarly, accused Naresh has transferred a
sum of Rs.400/ on 05.02.2024, a sum of Rs.500/ on
17.02.2024; and a sum of Rs.1300/, on 19.03.2024.
Thus, he has transferred a total sum of Rs.2200/.
11.37. Similarly, accused Brij Mohan has transferred a
sum of Rs.1800/ on 19.02.2024, a sum of Rs.200/ on
19.02.2024, a sum of Rs.600/ on 01.03.2024, and a sum
of Rs.200/ on 01.03.2024. Thus, he has transferred a
sum of Rs.2800/.
11.38. Thus, according to the Police, Deepak Sharma
(applicant), has made transactions worth Rs.33,228/ from
his account with the other accused persons. As such,
22 2026:HHC:2483
there is specific allegation that Deepak Sharma (applicant),
has made transactions of a total sum of Rs.92,378/ with
the other accused persons, for purchase of Chitta.
11.39. So far as the involvement of applicant Nishant
Chauhan is concerned, on the basis of the bank account
statements of applicant Shahi Mahatma, maintained with
ASP International Bank, it was found that applicant
Nishant Chauhan has made transactions from his bank
account, which is linked with mobile No.7807285292,
with applicant Shahi Mahatma.
11.40. As per the said statement, on 20.01.2024,
applicant Nishant Chauhan, has transferred a sum of
Rs.3200/; on 20.01.2024, a sum of Rs.3200/; on
27.01.2024, a sum of Rs.3200/; on 29.01.2024, a sum of
Rs.3000/; on 25.02.2024, a sum of Rs.3000/; on
28.04.2024, a sum of Rs.3000/; on 28.04.2024, a sum of
Rs.2500/; on 28.04.2024, a sum of Rs.500/; on
28.04.2024, a sum of Rs.5000/; on 28.04.2024, a sum of
Rs.1000/; on 05.05.2024, a sum of Rs.3000/; on
11.05.2024, a sum of Rs.3000/; on 11.05.2024, a sum of
Rs.5000/; on 19.05.2024, a sum of Rs.500/; on
23 2026:HHC:2483
20.05.2024, a sum of Rs.1000/; on 20.05.2024, a sum of
Rs.1000/; on 20.05.2024, a sum of Rs.1000/; on
20.05.2024, a sum of Rs.1000/; on 20.05.2024, a sum of
Rs.1000/; on 20.05.2024, a sum of Rs.1000/; on
20.05.2024, a sum of Rs.800/; on 21.05.2024, a sum of
Rs.1000/; on 21.05.2024, a sum of Rs.1000/; on
20.05.2024, a sum of Rs.800/; on 24.05.2024, a sum of
Rs.1000/; on 24.05.2024, a sum of Rs.1000/; on
24.05.2024, a sum of Rs.700/; on 25.05.2024, a sum of
Rs.1000/; on 25.05.2024, a sum of Rs.1000/; on
25.05.2024, a sum of Rs.200/; on 25.05.2024, a sum of
Rs.100/; on 27.05.2024, a sum of Rs.1000/; on
27.05.2024, a sum of Rs.1000/; on 29.05.2024, a sum of
Rs.1000/; on 29.05.2024, a sum of Rs.1000/; on
30.05.2024, a sum of Rs.1000/; on 30.05.2024, a sum of
Rs.500/; on 31.05.2024, a sum of Rs.900/; on
01.06.2024, a sum of Rs.1000/; on 01.06.2024, a sum of
Rs.1000/; on 01.06.2024, a sum of Rs.500/; on
02.06.2024, a sum of Rs.1200/; on 03.06.2024, a sum of
Rs.1000/; on 03.06.2024, a sum of Rs.1000/; on
03.06.2024, a sum of Rs.200/; on 04.06.2024, a sum of
24 2026:HHC:2483
Rs.1000/; on 04.06.2024, a sum of Rs.1000/; on
04.06.2024, a sum of Rs.400/. Thus, a total sum of
Rs.67,400/ was credited in his account.
11.41. Apart from this, in the bank account of Shahi
Mahatma, maintained with Mangal Dass & Sons, there are
transactions of Rs.500/ on 01.06.2024 and a sum of
Rs.2000/ on 27.08.2024. Thus, a sum of Rs.2500/ was
credited in his account. In the Bank account
No.7541002100001139, maintained with ASP International
Bank, on 06.03.2024, applicant Nishant Chauhan has
transferred a sum of Rs.3000/; on 14.03.2024, a sum of
Rs.5000/; on 03.04.2024, a sum of Rs.3000/; on
06.04.2024, a sum of Rs.3000/; on 09.04.2024, a sum of
Rs.3000/; on 12.04.2024, a sum of Rs.2000/; on
15.04.2024, a sum of Rs.1000/; on 15.04.2024, a sum of
Rs.1000/; on 15.04.2024, a sum of Rs.1000/; on
29.04.2024, a sum of Rs.3000/; on 30.04.2024, a sum of
Rs.3000/; on 02.05.2024, a sum of Rs.1000/; on
02.05.2024, a sum of Rs.1000/; on 02.05.2024, a sum of
Rs.1000/; on 02.05.2024, a sum of Rs.1000/; on
03.05.2024, a sum of Rs.3000/; on 04.05.2024, a sum of
25 2026:HHC:2483
Rs.5000/; on 13.05.2024, a sum of Rs.3000/; on
14.05.2024, a sum of Rs.3000/; on 14.05.2024, a sum of
Rs.1000/; on 14.05.2024, a sum of Rs.1000/; on
14.05.2024, a sum of Rs.1000/; on 17.05.2024, a sum of
Rs.5000/; on 17.05.2024, a sum of Rs.200/; and on
17.05.2024, a sum of Rs.100/. Thus, a total sum of
Rs.54,300/ were credited in his account.
11.42. Similarly, Nishant Chauhan (applicant), has
transferred a sum of Rs. 2,500/, on 06.08.2024, and a
sum of Rs. 2000/ on 08.08.2024, total sum of Rs.4500/
in the account of Muddasir Ahmad Mochi.
11.43. As per the status report, the bank account in
ASP International Bank was registered in the name of
associate/partner Shivraj Dada Saheb Patil, which was
operated by Shahi Mahatma and was transferred from
Maharashtra to Rohru. Accused Sahil Thakur used to
make small parcels of Chitta/Heroin in the company of
applicant Shahi Mahatma and put the same in different
locations, in lieu of that he used to get Chitta, for his
consumption free of cost.
26 2026:HHC:2483
11.44. It has also been mentioned in the status report
that applicantsHitesh Thakur, Nishant Chauhan and
Deepak Sharma, were also indulged in the purchase Chitta
from Shahi Mahatma and used to sell the same to the local
boys.
11.45. As per the status report, the transactions, in
the bank accounts of applicantsHitesh Thakur, Nishant
Chauhan and Deepak Sharma, make it crystal clear that
they have not only purchased the Chitta from Shahi
Mahatma, for their personal use, but, also for sale to the
others. The recovered contraband, in the present case, can
affect about 5000 persons, due to which, the protection of
the younger generation from Chitta will become a difficult
and serious problem.
11.46. It has also been mentioned in the status report
that all the accused persons had made a transaction in the
account of Shahi Mahatma and had constituted an
interstate Drug Racket. Accused Shahi Mahatma, with the
help of other coaccused, had done a trade of more than
rupees five crores. Applicants Hitesh Thakur, Nishant
Chauhan and Deepak Sharma, are also part of the said
27 2026:HHC:2483
racket. Their involvement was also found in the report of
SFSL Junga, regarding mobile phone of applicant Shahi
Mahatma, in which, Whatsapp messages, Calls, Videos and
Screenshots were found. They also used to make payment
through UPI mode in the account of Shahi Mahatma and
used to sell the contraband of Shahi Mahatma in Rohru
area and in lieu of that, they used to get free Chitta, for
their consumption.
11.47. It has been mentioned, in the status report,
that investigation, in the present case, is complete and the
chargesheet has been filed in the Court of learned
Additional Sessions JudgeI, Shimla.
11.48. Lastly, it has been apprehended that in case,
the applicants are ordered to be released on bail, they may
tinker with the evidence and also help the other accused
persons to flee away.
12. On the basis of the above facts, a prayer has
been made to dismiss the application.
13. The FIR, has been registered, in the present
case, under Sections 21 and 29 of the NDPS Act . The
28 2026:HHC:2483
provisions of Section 21 and 29 of the NDPS Act, are
reproduced, as under:
21. Punishment for contravention in
relation to manufactured drugs and
preparations.—
Whoever, in contravention of any provision of
this Act or any rule or order made or condition of
licence granted thereunder, manufactures,
possesses, sells, purchases, transports, imports
interState, exports interState or uses any
manufactured drug or any preparation
containing any manufactured drug shall be
punishable.
(a) where the contravention involves small
quantity, with rigorous imprisonment for a term
which may extend to one year, or with fine
which may extend to ten thousand rupees, or
with both;
(b)where the contravention involves quantity,
lesser than commercial quantity but greater than
small quantity, with rigorous imprisonment for a
term which may extend to ten years and with
fine which may extend to one lakh rupees;
(c) where the contravention involves
commercial quantity, with rigorous imprisonment
for a term which shall not be less than ten years
but which may extend to twenty years and shall
also be liable to fine which shall not be less than
one lakh rupees but which may extend to two
lakh rupees:
Provided that the court may, for reasons to be
recorded in the judgment, impose a fine
exceeding two lakh rupees.
29. Punishment for abetment and criminal
conspiracy:
(1)Whoever abets, or is a party to a criminal
conspiracy to commit an offence punishable
29 2026:HHC:2483
under this Chapter, shall, whether such offence
be or be not committed in consequence of such
abetment or in pursuance of such criminal
conspiracy, and notwithstanding anything
contained in section 116 of the Indian Penal
Code (45 of 1860), be punishable with the
punishment provided for the offence.
(2)A person abets, or is a party to a criminal
conspiracy to commit, an offence, within the
meaning of this section, who, in India abets or is
a party to the criminal conspiracy to the
commission of any act in a place without and
beyond India which
(a)would constitute an offence if committed
within India; or
(b)under the laws of such place, is an
offence relating to narcotic drugs or psychotropic
substances having all the legal conditions
required to constitute it such an offence the
same as or analogous to the legal conditions
required to constitute it an offence punishable
under this Chapter, if committed within India.
14. From the bare reading of Section 29 of the
NDPS Act, it can be said that in this Section also, similar
punishment has been provided, as has been provided for
the main offence. The contraband, weighing 468.368
grams, has been recovered from accused Muddasir Ahmad
Mochi, with whom, the applicants had financial
transactions. As such, it can be said that rigors of Section
37 of the NDPS Act are fully applicable to the case of the
applicant.
30 2026:HHC:2483
15. The applicants, in the present case, have been
arrested, under the provisions of NDPS Act. The
legislature, in its wisdom, has enacted this statute to curb
the menace of drug abuse with stringent punishment.
Certain conditions are there, in the NDPS Act, in the shape
of Section 37 of NDPS Act, which are, in addition to the
conditions, as contained in Section 483 of the BNSS.
16. Once, it has been held that the contraband
allegedly recovered in the present case falls in the category
of ‘commercial quantity’, as per the Notification issued by
the Central Government, then, the rigors of Section 37 of
the NDPS Act come into play.
17. The contraband allegedly recovered in this case,
admittedly, falls within the definition of ‘commercial
quantity’. As such, the rigors of Section 37 of NDPS Act
are applicable, in this case.
18. In a recent decision, in case, titled as
Narcotics Control Bureau versus Mohit Aggarwal,
reported in AIR 2022 SC 3444, the Hon’ble Supreme
Court has reiterated the earlier view regarding compliance
of the conditions, as enumerated in Section 37 of the NDPS
31 2026:HHC:2483
Act. The relevant paras 10 to 15 of the judgment are
reproduced, as under:
“10. The provisions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act
read as follows:
“[37. Offences to be cognizable and non
bailable.–(1) Notwithstanding anything
contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure,
1973 (2 of 1974)
(a) every offence punishable under this Act
shall be cognizable;
(b) no person accused of an offence
punishable for [offences under section 19 or
section 24 or section 27A and also for
offences involving commercial quantity] shall
be released on bail or on his own bond
unless
(i) the Public Prosecutor has been given an
opportunity to oppose the application for
such release, and
(ii) where the Public Prosecutor opposes
the application, the court is satisfied that
there are reasonable grounds for believing
that he is not guilty of such offence and
that he is not likely to commit any offence
while on bail.
(2) The limitations on granting of bail specified in
clause (b) of sub section (1) are in addition to the
limitations under the Code of Criminal Procedure,
1973 (2 of 1974) or any other law for the time
being in force, on granting of bail.
11. It is evident from a plain reading of the non
obstante clause inserted in subsection (1) and the
conditions imposed in subsection (2) of Section 37
that there are certain restrictions placed on the
power of the Court when granting bail to a person
accused of having committed an offence under the
NDPS Act. Not only are the limitations imposed
32 2026:HHC:2483
under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973 to be kept in mind, the restrictions
placed under clause (b) of subsection (1) of Section
37 are also to be factored in. The conditions
imposed in subsection (1) of Section 37 is that (i)
the Public Prosecutor ought to be given an
opportunity to oppose the application moved by an
accused person for release and (ii) if such an
application is opposed, then the Court must be
satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for
believing that the person accused is not guilty of
such an offence. Additionally, the Court must be
satisfied that the accused person is unlikely to
commit any offence while on bail.
12. The expression “reasonable grounds” has
come up for discussion in several rulings of this
Court. In “Collector of Customs, New Delhi v.
Ahmadalieva Nodira”, (2004) 3 SCC 549, a
decision rendered by a Three Judges Bench of this
Court, it has been held thus:
“7. The limitations on granting of bail come in
only when the question of granting bail arises
on merits. Apart from the grant of opportunity
to the Public Prosecutor, the other twin
conditions which really have relevance so far
as the present accused respondent is
concerned, are: the satisfaction of the court
that there are reasonable grounds for
believing that the accused is not guilty of the
alleged offence and that he is not likely to
commit any offence while on bail. The
conditions are cumulative and not alternative.
The satisfaction contemplated regarding the
accused being not guilty has to be based on
reasonable grounds. The expression
“reasonable grounds” means something
more than prima facie grounds. It
contemplates substantial probable
causes for believing that the accused is
not guilty of the alleged offence. The
reasonable belief contemplated in the
provision requires existence of such facts
and circumstances as are sufficient in
33 2026:HHC:2483
themselves to justify satisfaction that the
accused is not guilty of the alleged
offence.” [emphasis added]
13. The expression “reasonable ground” came up
for discussion in “State of Kerala and others Vs.
Rajesh and others” (2020) 12 SCC 122 and this
Court has observed as below:
“20. The expression “reasonable grounds”
means something more than prima facie
grounds. It contemplates substantial probable
causes for believing that the accused is not
guilty of the alleged offence. The reasonable
belief contemplated in the provision
requires existence of such facts and
circumstances as are sufficient in
themselves to justify satisfaction that the
accused is not guilty of the alleged
offence. In the case on hand, the High Court
seems to have completely overlooked the
underlying object of Section 37 that in
addition to the limitations provided under the
CrPC, or any other law for the time being in
force, regulating the grant of bail, its liberal
approach in the matter of bail under the NDPS
Act is indeed uncalled for.” [emphasis added]
14. To sum up, the expression “reasonable
grounds” used in clause (b) of SubSection (1)
of Section 37 would mean credible, plausible
and grounds for the Court to believe that the
accused person is not guilty of the alleged
offence. For arriving at any such conclusion,
such facts and circumstances must exist in a
case that can persuade the Court to believe
that the accused person would not have
committed such an offence. Dovetailed with
the aforesaid satisfaction is an additional
consideration that the accused person is
unlikely to commit any offence while on bail.
15. We may clarify that at the stage of
examining an application for bail in the
context of the Section 37 of the Act, the Court
34 2026:HHC:2483
is not required to record a finding that the
accused person is not guilty. The Court is also
not expected to weigh the evidence for arriving
at a finding as to whether the accused has
committed an offence under the NDPS Act or
not. The entire exercise that the Court is
expected to undertake at this stage is for the
limited purpose of releasing him on bail. Thus,
the focus is on the availability of reasonable
grounds for believing that the accused is not
guilty of the offences that he has been
charged with and he is unlikely to commit an
offence under the Act while on bail.”
19. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in a case,
Criminal Appeal No. 5544 of 2024 , titled as ‘Narcotics
Control Bureau versus Kashif’, Neutral Citation No.
2024 INSC 1045, has again reiterated the law, as
enumerated by it, in Mohit Aggarwal’s case (supra). The
Hon’ble Supreme Court, in this case, has held that the
provisions of Section 37 of NDPS Act are mandatory in
nature. Relevant paragraphs 8 and 39 of the said judgment
are reproduced, as under:
“8. There has been consistent and persistent view
of this Court that in the NDPS cases, where the
offence is punishable with minimum sentence of ten
years, the accused shall generally be not released
on bail. Negation of bail is the rule and its grant is
an exception. While considering the application for
bail, the court has to bear in mind the provisions of
Section 37 of the NDPS Act, which are mandatory in
nature. The recording of finding as mandated in
Section 37 is a sine qua non for granting bail to the
accused involved in the offences under the said Act.
35 2026:HHC:2483
Apart from the granting opportunity of hearing to
the Public Prosecutor, the other two conditions i.e.,
(i) the satisfaction of the court that there are
reasonable grounds for believing that the accused
is not guilty of the alleged offence and that (ii) he is
not likely to commit any offence while on bail, are
the cumulative and not alternative conditions.
xxx xxx xxx
39. The upshot of the above discussion may be
summarized as under:
(i) The provisions of NDPS Act are required to be
interpreted keeping in mind the scheme, object and
purpose of the Act; as also the impact on the society
as a whole. It has to be interpreted literally and not
liberally, which may ultimately frustrate the object,
purpose and Preamble of the Act.
(ii) While considering the application for bail, the
Court must bear in mind the provisions of Section
37 of the NDPS Act which are mandatory in nature.
Recording of findings as mandated in Section 37 is
sine qua non is known for granting bail to the
accused involved in the offences under the NDPS
Act.
(iii) The purpose of insertion of Section 52A laying
down the procedure for disposal of seized Narcotic
Drugs and Psychotropic Substances, was to ensure
the early disposal of the seized contraband drugs
and substances. It was inserted in 1989 as one of
the measures to implement and to give effect to the
International Conventions on the Narcotic drugs
and psychotropic substances.
(iv) Subsection (2) of Section 52A lays down the
procedure as contemplated in subsection (1)
thereof, and any lapse or delayed compliance
thereof would be merely a procedural irregularity
which would neither entitle the accused to be
released on bail nor would vitiate the trial on that
ground alone.
(v) Any procedural irregularity or illegality found to
have been committed in conducting the search and
seizure during the course of investigation or
36 2026:HHC:2483
thereafter, would by itself not make the entire
evidence collected during the course of
investigation, inadmissible. The Court would have
to consider all the circumstances and find out
whether any serious prejudice has been caused to
the accused.
(vi) Any lapse or delay in compliance of Section 52A
by itself would neither vitiate the trial nor would
entitle the accused to be released on bail. The Court
will have to consider other circumstances and the
other primary evidence collected during the course
of investigation, as also the statutory presumption
permissible under Section 54 of the NDPS Act.”
(selfemphasis supplied)
20. Bail, in this case, has also been sought on the
ground of parity, as coaccused of the applicants, have
already been released, on bail, by the Court of learned
Special JudgeI, Shimla.
21. It is no longer res integra that the Court is
bound to give positive findings, whichh should be more
than prima facie findings, under Section 37(1)(b)(i) and (ii)
of the NDPS Act, in the cases, where the contraband falls
within the definition of ‘commercial quantity’, however, the
learned trial Court, which had released the other co
acused, with whom, the applicants are seeking parity, has
not bothered even to mention the provisions of Section 37
(1)(b) (ii) of the NDPS Act. It has now been mandated in
37 2026:HHC:2483
Kashif’s case (supra) that the Court is bound to consider
the provisions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act and those
provisions are held to be mandatory in nature.
22. Applicant Hitesh Thakur, was earlier released
on bail, by the learned Special JudgeI, Shimla, vide order
dated 01.01.2025. Perusal of the order dated 01.01.2025,
reveals that the learned trial Court has not recorded the
findings, as mandated by Section 37 (1)(b)(ii) of the NDPS
Act. There is nothing on the record to demonstrate as to
how the learned trial Court has concluded that the
contraband could be used by the applicant for their
consumption and in utter disregard to the mandatory
provisions of NDPS Act, the offence is stated to be bailable
one.
23. Perusal of the order passed by learned Special
JudgeI, Shimla, reveals that the said order has been
passed by the learned Special Judge, in utter disregard to
the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in
Kashif’s case (supra). In the order, the learned Special
JudgeI, Shimla, has not touched the provisions of Section
37 of the NDPS Act.
38 2026:HHC:2483
24. Considering all these facts, no case to pass any
order in favour of the applicants, under Section 483 BNSS,
is made out, at this stage. Consequently, the bail
applications of the applicants are dismissed.
25. Any of the observations, made herein above,
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.
Copy of this order be placed, on the record of
each file.
( Virender Singh )
January 08, 2026(ps) Judge
Legal Notes
Add a Note....