Saurabh Kumar vs State Of Himachal Pradesh

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J

For possessing commercial quantity of contraband FIR No.11/2021, dated 18.2.2021 came to be lodged against the petitioner under Sections 20,25

and 29 of the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (In short ‘NDPS Act’), at Police Station Swarghat, District Bilaspur,

H.P. The petitioner is behind the bars in this FIR w.e.f. 18.2.2021 and through present petition seeks his enlargement on regular bail.

Briefly, the allegations of prosecution are that on 18.2.2021 a police party was patrolling the area within its jurisdiction. At around 3.05 PM, it

noticed an Innova Cresta vehicle bearing No HR54D-5121 coming from Swarghat side. The vehicle was signaled to stop. Three occupants of the

vehicle including the petitioner appeared scared and perplexed. They also tried to dissuade the patrolling party from searching the vehicle. Their

actions raised suspicion in the eyes of the police personnel, who thought it prudent to search the vehicle. At that time another vehicle bearing No.

HP89-0437 came from Kiratpur side, which was also signaled to stop and its driver was associated as an independent witness during search of the

Innova Cresta vehicle. The search of the vehicle was carried out in accordance with law. During the search, from the dickey of the vehicle, a carry

bag was found kept underneath the mat. It contained black colour substance, which was determined as cannabis. It weighed 1.024 Kgs along with the

carry bag. The recovery of commercial quantity of the contraband led to registration of the FIR in question.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that 1.024 Kgs was the weight of the contraband allegedly recovered along with carry bag containing

the said contraband, therefore, provisions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act will not be applicable. Per contra, learned Deputy Advocate General

submitted that as per the report of State Forensic Science Laboratory (SFSL), the weight of the contraband minus weight of the carry bag was 1.008

Kg, therefore, Section 37 of the Act gets attracted. He further submitted that the petitioner has not been able to make out a case for his enlargement

on bail.

As per the status report, the petitioner was present in the vehicle at the time of its search. He was occupying the backseat of the vehicle in

question. From the dickey of this vehicle, occupied by the petitioner cannabis was recovered which measured 1.008 Kgs without the weight of carry

bag. The quantity being commercial attracts the provisions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act. There is nothing to indicate that the petitioner was not

aware of or did not possess the contraband recovered from the vehicle. The petitioner has failed to make out a case towards satisfaction of rigors of

Section 37 of the NDPS Act. Therefore, I find no merit in the present petition and the same is accordingly dismissed. However, liberty is reserved to

the petitioner to file a fresh petition in accordance with law.