Himachal Pradesh High Court
Bhupinder Dutta vs State Of Himachal Pradesh on 19 May, 2026
Author: Virender Singh
Bench: Virender Singh
1 2026:HHC:18110
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Cr.MP(M) Nos. : 256 & 414 of 2026
.
Reserved on :08.05.2026
Decided on : 19.05.2026
Cr. M.P.(M) No. 256 of 2026
Bhupinder Dutta ...Applicant
of
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh ...Respondent
Samta Aggarwal
rt
Cr. M.P.(M) No. 414 of 2026
...Applicant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh ...Respondent
Coram
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?1
For the applicant(s) : Mr. N.S. Chandel, Senior
Advocate, with Ms. Shwetima
Dogra and Ms. Kanika Verma,
Advocates, for applicant
Bhupinder Dutta.
Ms. Mercy Hussain and Mr.
Servedaman Rathore,
Advocates, for applicant Samta
Aggarwal.
For the respondent : Mr. Tejasvi Sharma, Mr. H.S.
Rawat and Mr. Mohinder
1
Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes.
::: Downloaded on - 23/05/2026 10:01:52 :::CIS
2 2026:HHC:18110
Zharaick, Additional Advocates
General, assisted by Dy. SP
Shakti Singh and SI Vijay Pal,
CID Bharari, Shimla.
.
Virender Singh, Judge
The abovetitled bail applications are being of disposed of by the common order, as, both the bail applications have been filed by the applicants, under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, rt 2023 (hereinafter referred to as the 'BNSS'), for releasing them on bail, during the pendency of the trial, arising out of FIR No. 125/2023, dated 15.09.2023, registered with Police Station Gagret, District Una, H.P., under Sections 22, 25, 29 of Narcotics Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the ND&PSAct'), read with Sections 201, 465, 467, 471 of Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as the 'IPC').
2. According to the applicants, they are innocent and falsely been implicated, in the present case. The investigation is stated to be complete and police has filed the chargesheet.
::: Downloaded on - 23/05/2026 10:01:52 :::CIS3 2026:HHC:18110
3. Apart from this, both the petitioners have pleaded that they have no role in the commission of alleged .
crime, and both of them have taken the plea that they have falsely been implicated, in this case.
4. It is the further case of the applicants that chances of conclusion of trial against them, in near future, of are not so bright and no useful purpose would be served by keeping the applicants in judicial custody, as both the rt applicants are in judicial custody.
5. According to the applicant Bhupinder Dutta, he was arrested on 15.09.2024 and at the time of arrest, the Investigating Officer has not informed the accused about the grounds of his arrest, nor the same have been supplied to him, as mandated under Article 22(1) of Constitution of India.
6. According to the applicant Samta Aggarwal, she was arrested on 18.07.2025. According to her, the only evidence against her is the statements of Aman Kumar and Naresh Kumar Miglani, and those two statements are too short to connect her with the crime in question. It is her further case that statements of those two witnesses were ::: Downloaded on - 23/05/2026 10:01:52 :::CIS 4 2026:HHC:18110 recorded by the police at a belated stage. Apart from this, according to her, she has been arrested, in this case, on .
the basis of her alleged telephonic conversation with Sahil Goswami on 06.09.2023 and 07.09.2023.
7. According to her, she had talked with Sahil Goswami, as her husband was arrested on 01.09.2023, of and was lodged in Patiala Jail and in order to engage a lawyer for her husband, she had talked to Sahil Goswami.
rt
8. Both the applicants have given the history of earlier bail applications moved by them.
9. On the basis of above facts, a prayer has been made by the applicants to release them on bail, as the conditions, as enumerated in Section 37(i)(b)(ii) of the ND&PS Act, are existing in their favour.
10. Both the applicants have given certain undertakings, for which, they are ready to abide by, in case, released on bail, during the pendency of trial.
11. When put to notice, police has filed the status report, disclosing therein, that on 15.9.2023, Additional Superintendent of Police Shri Rajender Kumar, ANTF Kangra, has submitted the ruqua to Police of Gagret, for ::: Downloaded on - 23/05/2026 10:01:52 :::CIS 5 2026:HHC:18110 the registration of the FIR. In the ruqua, it has been mentioned by the Additional Superintendent of Police, Shri .
Rajender Kumar, ANTF, Kangra that he, alongwith other police officials, was on patrolling duty and the duty to detect the crime, relating to narcotic drugs.
11.1 On 15.9.2023, at about 7: 30 p.m., he i.e. I.O.
of was present on the gate of Shiv Bari temple. At that time, he received a secret information, with regard to indulgence rt of one Varinder Kumar @ Bindu, s/o Shri Vikram Chand, R/o ward No. 5, NAC Gagret, Tehsil Ghanari, District Una, in the business of selling the narcotic substance.
11.2 As per the information, a big haul of the medicines was being transported in pickup No. HP36B 8124 to his residential house from Army Ground, Gagret.
The said information was found to be authentic and reliable. It has also been informed that in case, the said vehicle is checked, large quantity of the narcotic substances, could be recovered.
11.3 It is the further case of the I.O. that in case, the efforts to obtain the authorization letter/search warrant would have been made, in that eventuality, contraband ::: Downloaded on - 23/05/2026 10:01:52 :::CIS 6 2026:HHC:18110 could be removed. Thereafter, Drug Inspector Rajat Sharma was informed and asked to come near the Army .
Ground. Thereafter, the I.O. alongwith the police officials had proceeded towards the Army Ground, Gagret. The information under Section, 42(2) of the NDPS Act, was prepared and was submitted to SDPO, Amb, through LHC of Aruna Kumari, ANTF, Kangra. When, the I.O., alongwith police officials reached outside the Army Ground, Gagret, rt at about 8:10 p.m, he noticed two persons, namely Avinash Bhardwaj and Kusum Lata, who is Vice President of Nagar Panchayat, Gagret. Both of them were apprised about the secret information, as received by the I.O. and associated in the investigation of the case.
11.4 When, they entered the Army Ground, then they noticed the aforesaid pickup, being driven by its driver, coming towards Army Ground. The I.O., with the help of other police officials, had stopped the said vehicle.
In the meanwhile, Drugs Inspector Rajat Sharma also reached there, who was also associated in the investigation, in the presence of local witnesses. The I.O.
has shown his identity card to both the persons, sitting in ::: Downloaded on - 23/05/2026 10:01:52 :::CIS 7 2026:HHC:18110 the vehicle. Thereafter, they were inquired about the white plastic sack. Both of them had disclosed that this box .
(builty) belongs to Varinder Kumar @ Bindu, S/o Shri Vikram Chand. In the presence of these witnesses, both the said persons were directed to come out. Thereafter, a white coloured sack was opened and a card board box, of containing 60 card board boxes were found in it, and in the other box, 59 card board boxes, were found. Drugs rt Inspector Rajat Sharma checked the aforesaid boxes, in the presence of the witnesses, and on opening the boxes, Cap.
Paracetamol, Dicyclomine, Hydrocholride and Tramadol Hydrochloride capsules Proxywel spas were found. Total 14,400 capsules were found in the box, which has been marked as markI. In the other box, which has been marked as mark2, 14160 capsules were found. Thus, total 28560 capsules were found.
11. 5 On inquiry, the driver of the pickup disclosed his name as Maan Singh, S/o Munna Ram, VPO Gagret, Tehsil Ghanari, District Una.
::: Downloaded on - 23/05/2026 10:01:52 :::CIS8 2026:HHC:18110 11.6 Other codal formalities were completed.
Thereafter, ruqua was prepared and submitted to Police .
Station, Gagret, for the registration of the FIR.
11.7 Initially, the investigation was conducted by Additional S.P. Rajender Kumar and thereafter, the same was handed over to I.O./Inspector/Incharge, Police of Station, Gagret, Sh. Sunny Guleria. Spot map was prepared. Accused Maan Singh and Mahasu Ram rt were inquired. Thereafter, the matter was inquired from Bhupender Dutta S/o Sukhdev Chand Dutta, who was running a chemist shop in Gagret. He was also associated in the investigation. During investigation, accused Mahasu Ram disclosed that the photo of goods receipt of the parcel was forwarded to him by Varinder Kumar @ Bindu, through whatsapp, and he was directed to receive the said parcel from Kamal Transport, Gagret, and hand over the same to Varinder Kumar at his home.
11.8 On inquiry, applicant Bhupender Dutta disclosed that the parcel containing contraband belong to Varinder Kumar @ Bindu. However, the bill of the same was issued in the name of Dutta Medical Agency, Gagret.
::: Downloaded on - 23/05/2026 10:01:52 :::CIS9 2026:HHC:18110 In lieu of the issuance of bill, Varinder Kumar @ Bindu used to pay five boxes of Tramadol free of cost to him.
.
11.9 It is the further case of the Police that number of persons were found involved in the case. Accused Maan Singh, Mahasu Ram and Bhupinder Dutta (applicant) were arrested on 15.9.2023 at about 10:30 p.m. All the of four persons have been medicolegally examined. On 16.9.2023, they were produced before the Court of learned rt Chief Judicial Magistrate, Una, who had remanded them to Police custody, for three days.
11.10 On 16.9.2023, one Vishal Jaswal informed the Police that one parcel in the name of Dutta Medical Agency has been received through Kamal Transport, upon which, Assistant Drugs Inspector Shashi Pal reached at the spot, where owner of Kamal Goods, through Vishal Jaswal, has produced one parcel alongwith carbon copy of GR No. A59198, dated 14.9.2023, and one bill of Jan Priya Pharma 27/16, Chhoti Sabzi Mandi Janakpuri, New Delhi, to the police. Said bill was in the name of Dutta Medical Agency, Gagret. When, the said parcel was opened in the presence of witnesses, the same was found containing 25,000 ::: Downloaded on - 23/05/2026 10:01:52 :::CIS 10 2026:HHC:18110 tablets of Tramadol Hydrochloride tablets 100 mg Clovedol 100 SR, which is a prohibited drug. The above medicines .
were taken into possession.
11.11 During investigation, mobile phones of accused, bearing Nos. 9816042336, 8278733069, 8580581311, as well as, phone of accused Maan Singh, bearing No. of 9816503646 and, of applicant Bhupender Dutta, bearing No. 9816956481, were taken into possession.
rt 11.12 During investigation, it was found that according to GR No. A59051, dated 12.9.2023, and GR No. A 59198, dated 14.9.2023, parcel received through Kamal Goods Carrier Delhi, in the name of Dutta Medical Agency, Gagret, were forwarded by Jan Priya Pharma 27/16 Chhoti Sabzi Mandi, Janakpuri, New Delhi. However, when, the I.O. verified the said fact, it was found that the said bills, were not issued by the said firm.
11.13 On 20.9.2023, shop of applicant Bhupender Dutta was searched. During search, documents, pertaining to GR No. 58021, dated 23.8.2023 and invoice No. 00325, dated 23.3.2023, were found to be issued by Jan Priya ::: Downloaded on - 23/05/2026 10:01:52 :::CIS 11 2026:HHC:18110 Pharma Company. However, as per these invoices, these medicines were not found in the medical store.
.
11.14 As per letter of the Director General of Police, Himachal Pradesh, dated 26.9.2023, investigation of the case was transferred to CID. Consequently, a Special Investigating Team, under the leadership of Praveen of Dhiman, HPS, Additional S.P., Cyber Crime, was constituted. On 30.9.2023, the Special Investigation Team rt had taken over the investigation.
11.15 During investigation, it was found that recovered parcels, containing prohibited drugs were received at Jaswal Goods Carrier, Gagret, through Kamal Goods Carrier. It was also found that in the name of Dutta Medical Agency, other transports have also received consignment/parcels.
11.16 It was also found that Varinder Kumar was earlier running Chemist shop, under the name and style of 'Siddhi Vinayak', and now, he is running the same, under the name and style of 'M.B. Pharma'. In this regard, delivery register and challan forms were also obtained. On the perusal of the same, it was found that through these ::: Downloaded on - 23/05/2026 10:01:52 :::CIS 12 2026:HHC:18110 transports, consignment/parcels, worth crores of rupees, were found, in the name of Sidhi Vinayak, M.B. Medicine .
and Dutta Medical Agency.
11.17 The contraband, so recovered, was sent to SFSL, Junga. Weight of the parcel was found to be 15.681 kg. The said drug was found to be sample of Tramadol of capsules. In addition to this, the weight of the parcles, which has been marked as markB, containing Clovedol rt 100 SR, was found to be 8.450 kg. Manufacturer of the same was found to be the Akums Drugs and Pharmaceuticals IIE SIDKUL Haridwar. Consequently, company officials of Pure & Cure Healthcare Pvt. Ltd., Plot No. 26A, 2730 Sector 8A, IIE SIDKUL, Haridwar were associated in the investigation. On inquiry, it was found that their company is the subsidiary of Akums Drugs & Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Company. The factory of batch No. P06CA09 was not found to have manufactured Proxywel Spas medicine.
11.18 As per the further stand of the Police, from the recovered strips, eight digit number was found to be marked, which was 20130552. As per officials of the ::: Downloaded on - 23/05/2026 10:01:52 :::CIS 13 2026:HHC:18110 company, number 20130552 was the unique number of their company, being packing material Artwork Code .
number. The company used to get printed lay out from UTS Foils and Packaging and Perfect Print Pack. Similarly, police has also got haul of Clovedol tablets. However, batch number was found to be erased. The other 8 digit number of 20161349 was found to be printed on it. About this number, the company officials disclosed that this number rt is packing material Artwork Code number. The company used to get the said design Artwork from Shree Ji Enterprises.
11.19 During investigation, the I.O. also found that the applicant has smuggled the psychotropic substance from Jan Priya Pharma through Kamal Goods Transport.
These parcels were not sent by Jan Priya Pharma, Delhi, nor any invoice was found in their shop.
11.20 During investigation, it was found that on 14.9.2022, when the Police recovered the substance from vehicle No. HP 36B8124, Varinder Kumar has forwarded GR No. 59051, dated 12.9.2023 and GR No. A 59198, dated 14.9.2023 to Mahasu Ram, on his phone, through ::: Downloaded on - 23/05/2026 10:01:52 :::CIS 14 2026:HHC:18110 whatsapp. Varinder Kumar @ Bindu directed Mahasu Ram to receive parcel bearing GR No. 59051, dated 12.9.2023, .
and GR No. 59198, dated 14.9.2023. In the mobile handset, which was taken into possession from Mahasu Ram, photos of aforesaid GR Nos were found, whereas, in the mobile phone, of the applicant, photographs of of aforesaid GR Nos. were not found. Both these handsets and GR Nos. have been sent to RFSL, Dharamshala, for rt analysis.
11.21 During investigation, it was found that the handset on which, Varinder Kumar on 14.9.2023, had forwarded the photographs of aforesaid GR Nos. were having two sim cards, bearing No. 9816042336 and 8278733069. The IMEI number of these two slots were found to be 864372062985240 and 864372062985250, whereas, Varinder Kumar on 15.9.2023, produced the phone mark Oppo, bearing IMEI No. 866114046756195 and 866114046756187.
11.22 According to the police, variation in these numbers was due to the fact that Varinder Kumar used to conceal mobile handset, used for transporting of drugs ::: Downloaded on - 23/05/2026 10:01:52 :::CIS 15 2026:HHC:18110 through Mahasu Ram and produce some other mobile phones to the Police. It was also found during investigation .
that mobile handset, with the help of which, Varinder Kumar has forwarded the whatsapp messages to Mahasu Ram, in that mobile handset, w.e.f. 15.9.2023 to 6.10.2023, mobile phone numbers 8627872324 and of 7807786506 were found to be operating, whereas, according to customer application form, aforesaid mobile rt numbers were issued in the name of one Abhishek, s/o Ambika Prasad. Mobile Number 7807786506 was found in the name of Nisha Devi wife of Tilak Raj.
11.23 On 15.10.2023, search warrant of house and shop of Varinder Kumar was obtained. During search, some objectionable documents were found and Indian currency of Rs. 4,42,700/ and foreign currency of Rs.
1,40,000/ was found. On inquiry, Meenakshi Sharma could not give satisfactory reply. However, she has produced empty box of Oppo, on which EMEI 864372062985252 and 864372062985245 were found to be printed. It has also been found that Varinder Kumar, in the name of Dutta Medical Agency had transported the ::: Downloaded on - 23/05/2026 10:01:52 :::CIS 16 2026:HHC:18110 consignment worth rores of Rupees from Jan Priya Pharma, between 2020 to 2023. These facts have been .
highlighted just to show that these are forged documents.
11.24 As per the status report, the role attributed to the present case is that the accused in this case were working as interstate drug smuggler. They have adopted of the mode to smuggle the contraband substance through Kamal Goods Carrier. Accused Bhupinder Dutta, in this rt case, was arrested on 15.9.2024 and according to the Police, on 16.9.2023, Gagret Police has taken into possession the consignment, containing 25,000 tablets of Tramadol Hydrochloride tablets 100 mg Clovedol 100 SR.
Alongwith said parcel, copy of GR No. A59198, dated 14.9.2023 and invoice of Jan Priya Pharma is dated 13.9.2024. The said builty and invoice was in the name of 'Dutta Medical Agency Gagret.' 11.25 On 20.9.2023, in the presence of applicant Bhupinder Dutta and witness, the shop which was under
the name and style of 'Dutta Medical Agency, Gagret' was searched by Drug Inspector Rajat Sharma. During search of the premises of 'Dutta Medical Agency', one builty GR ::: Downloaded on - 23/05/2026 10:01:52 :::CIS 17 2026:HHC:18110 No. 58021, dated 23.8.2023, issued by Kamal Goods Carrier and one invoice of Jan Priya Pharma, bearing No. .
00325, dated 23.3.2023, were recovered.
11.26 As per further case of the Police, medicines, as shown in the invoice, issued by Jan Priya Pharma, were not found in the medical store. The said GR and invoice is of the same copy of GR/invoice, through which, drugs were transported on rt 14.9.2023 and 16.9.2023 and were recovered from the spot.
11.27 It is also the case of the police that Kamal Goods Carrier, Gagret, from the year 2019 to 2023, transported 82 consignments in the name of Dutta Medical Agency, forwarded by different firms and out of said 82 consignments, 42 consignments were sent by Jan Priya Pharma 27/16, Chhoti Sabzi Mandi, Janakpuri, New Delhi.
11.28 Lastly, it has been apprehended that in case, the applicant is released on bail, he may affect the investigation of the case and also allure the witnesses and may also leave the country. In case, he is ordered to be released on bail, it will give a wrong signal to the society and he may again indulge in the similar activities.
::: Downloaded on - 23/05/2026 10:01:52 :::CIS18 2026:HHC:18110
12. On the basis of above facts, a prayer has been made to dismiss the application.
.
13. Investigation, in the present case, is complete and Police has filed the Challan in the competent Court of law. The prayer of bail has been opposed, mainly on the ground that in case the applicant is released on bail, he of may coerced and allure the witnesses. Apart from this, it has also been apprehended that the applicant may leave rt the country, in case released on bail.
14. As per report of the Police, the contraband, so recovered, was sent for chemical analysis to SFSL, Junga by putting the same into parcels. Parcel MarkA was found containing Proxywell Spas, and total weight of the same was found to be 15.651 kg, and as per the report of the Laboratory, the same was found to be the sample of Tramadol, whereas parcel MarkB was containing tablets known as Clovedol 100 SR, and the total weight of the same was found to be 8.450 kg. As per the report of the laboratory, the same was also found to be the sample of tramadol.
::: Downloaded on - 23/05/2026 10:01:52 :::CIS19 2026:HHC:18110
15. In view of the notification issued by the Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue), dated 26.4.2018, the .
Tramadol has been entered at serial No. 110 Y, in the list of psychotropic substances, which are specified in the schedule to the NDPS Act. The small quantity is stated to be 5 grams and commercial quantity is stated to be 250 of grams. Meaning thereby, the contraband, which was allegedly recovered, in the present case, falls within the rt definition of 'commercial quantity'.
16. In nutshell, as per the status reports filed, the role, which has been attributed to applicant Bhupinder Dutta, has been summarized as under: "1. He is owner of Bhupinder Dutta Medical Agency, Gagret, Una.
2. The consignment, which was found by the police in the possession of accused Mahasu Ram and Maan Singh, on 14/15.09.2023, and consignment, which was recovered on 16.09.2023, both the consignments found containing prohibited drugs. In addition to this, invoices of Jan Priya Pharma were found and in those invoices, there is reference with regard to Masks, Sanitizer, Hand Gloves etc.. Both the parcels were in the name of Dutta Medical Agency, owned by Bhupinder Dutta, which, have been transported by accused Virender Kumar alias Bindu, with the help of his companion Vishal Sharma, from Delhi.
3. The contraband, which was recovered on 16.09.2023, the consignment of same was got booked by Virender Kumar alias Bindu, with the help of his companion Vishal Sharma on 12.09.2023 and Vishal Sharma with the help of Rishab Jain, got transported the alleged contraband from Mujafarnagar with the connivance of Rishab Jain. Rishab Jain has brought that contraband with his ::: Downloaded on - 23/05/2026 10:01:52 :::CIS 20 2026:HHC:18110 companion Mohammad Siraj from Mujafarnagar. The said consignment was received in Delhi, on 14.09.2023 and Rishab Jain, thereafter, engaged labourer Onkar Upadhayay and Captan Singh, and booked the same .
through Kamal Goods Carrier, Gagret, in the name of Dutta Medical Agency, Gagret. The said consignment was purported to be sent by Jan Priya Pharma invoice No. 00325, dated 13.09.2023. When the said parcel/ consignment was recovered by Gagret police, then from the parcel, 25,000 tablets of Clovidol 100 SR tablets containing Tramadol, were found. Along with the parcels GR No. A 59198, dated 14.09.2023 (Driver's copy) and Jan Priya Pharma invoice No. 00325, dated 13.09.2023, of were also recovered.
4. On 20.09.2023, when the shop of accused Bhupinder Dutta was searched, then during search, GR No. A 58021 dated 23.08.2023, issued by Kamal Goods Carrier and rt invoice No. 00325, dated 23.08.2023, purported to be issued by Jan Priya Pharma, were recovered, whereas, those medicines, which have been mentioned in the invoice of Jan Priya Pharma, were not found in the shop.
5. During investigation, it was found that Kamal Goods Carrier, Gagret, received 82 parcels, between 2019 to 2023, and out of those 82 parcels, 42 parcels were received through invoice of M/s Jan Priya Pharma.
6. During investigation, it has also been found that accused Bhupinder Dutta approach to the owner of Kamal Goods Carrier, Gagret and apprised him that parcels purposed to be reached in his name are of Virender alias Bindu and said Bindu, will receive the same."
17. So far as the specific role of Samta Aggarwal, as mentioned in the status reports, is concerned, the same is reproduced as under:
1. The consignment of contraband i.e. 28560 capsules of Proxywel Spas, which were recovered on the intervening night of 14/15.09.2023, the said consignment was transported by Virender Kumar alias Bindu, through his companion Vishal Sharma of Ludhiana. Accused Vishal Sharma further requested his companion Sahil Goswami of Sonepat, to deliver the contraband to Delhi.
2. Accused Sahil Goswami requested his companion Samta Aggarwal (applicant) to deliver the contraband, upon ::: Downloaded on - 23/05/2026 10:01:52 :::CIS 21 2026:HHC:18110 which, Samta Aggarwal handed over two packets of contraband through her servant Naresh Kumar Miglani, with a direction to hand over the same to Aman Kumar servant of Sahil Goswami. As per the directions of Samta .
Aggarwal, Naresh Kumar Miglani, handed over those parcels containing contraband to Aman Kumar, who is stated to be servant of Sahil Goswami. In this regard, both Naresh Kumar and Aman Kumar made their statements under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. Thereafter, Aman Kumar, as per the directions of Sahil Goswami got booked the parcels through Kamal Goods Carrier, in the name of Dutta Medical Agency, Gagret Una, by using Jan Priya Pharma invoice No. 00325, dated 12.09.2023.
of
3. On 12.09.2023, Sahil Goswami, Aman Kumar, Naresh Kumar and Samta Aggarwal (applicant), were found to be in connection with each other through phone.
4. During the period when she was on prearrest bail, Samta rt Aggarwal (applicant) has supplied damaged mobile phone make Samsung on 02.04.2024, to the police, which was sent to RFSL Junga, from where, the report was received, and as per the report "It could not be possible to extract the data from Ex1 as the device was found damaged and could not be operationalized".
5. Lastly, it has been alleged against Samta Aggarwal (applicant) that her husband Mahesh Aggarwal is undergoing sentence from 01.09.2023, in a case registered under ND&PS Act.
18. On the basis of the above facts, a prayer for bail has been opposed on the ground that in case, the applicants are released on bail, they may coerce the witnesses and it will give a wrong signal to the society.
Hence, a prayer for dismissal of the applications has been made.
19. The contraband involved, in the present case, falls within the definition of commercial quantity. Once, it has been held that the contraband, so recovered, falls ::: Downloaded on - 23/05/2026 10:01:52 :::CIS 22 2026:HHC:18110 within the definition of 'commercial quantity', then, rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act are applicable, in the present .
case.
20. The Police has registered the case under Sections 20 and 29 of the NDPS Act, as such, there is no substance in the argument of learned senior Counsel, of representing the applicant that nothing has been recovered from his possession. The provisions of Section 29 of the rt NDPS Act, are reproduced as under:
Section 29:Punishment for abetment and criminal conspiracy (1) Whoever abets, or is a party to a criminal conspiracy to commit, an offence punishable 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 ::: Downloaded on - 23/05/2026 10:01:52 :::CIS 23 2026:HHC:18110 offence the same as or analogous to the legal conditions required to constitute it an offence punishable under this Chapter, if committed within India.
.
21. The Hon'ble Apex Court in a recent decision, in case titled as Narcotics Control Bureau versus Mohit Aggarwal, reported in AIR 2022 SC 3444, has reiterated of the earlier view regarding compliance of the conditions, as enumerated in Section 37 of the NDPS Act. The relevant rt 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 nonbailable.-(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 nonobstante clause inserted in subsection (1) and the conditions imposed in subsection (2) of ::: Downloaded on - 23/05/2026 10:01:52 :::CIS 24 2026:HHC:18110 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 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 sub section (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 of 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 rt 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 ::: Downloaded on - 23/05/2026 10:01:52 :::CIS 25 2026:HHC:18110 and circumstances as are sufficient in 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 of accused is not guilty of the alleged offence. The reasonable belief contemplated in the provision requires existence of such rt 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 is not required to record a finding that the accused person is not guilty. The ::: Downloaded on - 23/05/2026 10:01:52 :::CIS 26 2026:HHC:18110 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."
of
22. In view of the above legal proposition, now, this Court would proceed further to ascertain the fact, as the rt reasonable grounds, as per provision of Section 37(i)(b)(ii) of the ND&PS Act are existing in favour of the applicants, or not.
23. First of all, coming to the case of Bhupinder Datta; applicant Bhupinder Datta was arrested on 15.09.2023 and thereafter, his shop i.e. Datta Medical Store was searched in his presence on 28.09.2023. On that day, Drugs Inspector, Rajat Sharma has inspected the premises in the presence of witness Sahil Sharma and during the search, bill No. 58021 dated 23.08.2023 and invoice No. 00325 dated 23.08.2023 purportedly issued by Jan Priya Pharma Company, were taken into possession and according to this memo, the medicines, as mentioned ::: Downloaded on - 23/05/2026 10:01:52 :::CIS 27 2026:HHC:18110 in the invoice, were not found in the medical store. The date of issuance of invoice No. 00325 is 23.08.2023 and .
GR No. A 58021 was also issued on 23.08.2023. When the recovery of the contraband, which was effected on the intervening night of 14/15.09.2023, from the possession of Maan Singh and Mahsu Ram, the documents, were taken of into their possession, which were G.R. No. A 59051 and invoice No. 00325 dated 12.09.2023. In the memo, which rt was prepared on the spot, G.R. No. 59051 along with the invoice No. 00325 dated 12.09.2023, has been mentioned to have been taken into possession. Both these documents were in the name of Datta Medical Agency. Even, on 16.09.2023, when recovery of second parcel from the premises of Kamal Goods Carrier was made, then, the contraband along with carbon copy of G.R. No. A 59198 and a bill issued by Jan Priya Pharma bearing No. 27/16, Choti Subzi Mandi, Janakpuri, New Delhi 110098 was taken into possession by the police. The document, which has been described, as issued by Jan Priya Pharma, is invoice No. 00325.
24. During the investigation, the police has ::: Downloaded on - 23/05/2026 10:01:52 :::CIS 28 2026:HHC:18110 recorded the statement of Arshan Kumar Jaswal, owner of Jaswal Goods Carrier, who has got recorded his statement, .
under Section 161 Cr.P.C., that applicant Bhupinder Datta, in the year 2020, came to his shop and requested that from Delhi, through Kamal Goods Carrier Transport, parcel consignments will reach, which was sent by Jan of Priya Pharma, in his name, but according to him, the parcel is of Bindu, who got transported the same in the rt name of applicant Bhupinder Datta. Said Bhupinder Datta never came to receive the delivery of 82 parcels.
25. Similar statement has also been made by office incharge of Jaswal Goods Carrier, Bharwani Road Gagret, namely Rajesh Kumar. The police has also arrested the applicant Bhupinder Datta under Section 29 of ND&PS Act and the defence of the applicant qua the fact that he has closed his business of selling medicines many years ago and his signboard on the shop, which contains all the particulars has been misused by other accused, is not liable to be taken into consideration, as the said stand of the applicant is his defence, which would be proved or probablized during the trial.
::: Downloaded on - 23/05/2026 10:01:52 :::CIS29 2026:HHC:18110
26. When, both the consignments, which were found containing contraband, which falls within the .
definition of commercial quantity, were transported in the name of Datta Medical Store, then, at this stage, it is not possible for this Court to record the findings in favour of of applicant Bhupinder Datta by holding that he is not guilty of such offence and while on bail, he is not likely to commit any offence.
rt As such, applicant Bhupinder Datta is not able to make out a case for release on bail. Consequently, his application is dismissed.
27. So far as applicant Samta Aggarwal is concerned, as per the investigating agency, her role has been found on the basis of her interaction on phone with witness Naresh Kumar on 12.09.2023. Admittedly, the police has placed on record the CDRs, but on the basis of CDRs, nothing culpate to applicant Samta Aggarwal, on this score.
28. Hon'ble Supreme Court in State by (NCB) Bengaluru versus Pallulabid Ahmad Arimutta & Anr., reported in 2022 (2) SCALE 14, has held that evidentiary ::: Downloaded on - 23/05/2026 10:01:52 :::CIS 30 2026:HHC:18110 value of the CDRs is to be determined, during trial.
Relevant portion of the judgment is reproduced as under:
.
"10. It has been held in clear terms in Tofan Singh Vs. State of Tamil Nadu , that a confessional statement recorded under Section 67 of the NDPS Act will remain inadmissible in the trial of an offence under the NDPS Act. In the teeth of the aforesaid decision, the arrests made by the petitionerNCB, on the basis of the confession/voluntary statements of the respondents or the coaccused 6 (2021) 4 SCC 1 Page 9 of 12 2022 Live Law (SC) 63 Petition for Special Leave to Appeal of (Criminal) No. 1569 OF 2021 under Section 67 of the NDPS Act, cannot form the basis for overturning the impugned orders releasing them on bail. The CDR details of some of the accused or the allegations of rt tampering of evidence on the part of one of the respondents is an aspect that will be examined at the stage of trial. For the aforesaid reason, this Court is not inclined to interfere in the orders dated 16th September, 2019, 14th January, 2020, 16th January, 2020, 19th December, 2019 and 20th January, 2020 passed in SLP (Crl.) No@ Diary No. 22702/2020, SLP (Crl.) No. 1454/2021, SLP (Crl.) No. 1465/2021, SLP (Crl.) No. 177374/2021 and SLP (Crl.) No. 2080/2021 respectively. The impugned orders are, accordingly, upheld and the Special Leave Petitions filed by the petitionerNCB seeking cancellation of bail granted to the respective respondents, are dismissed as meritless."
(self emphasis supplied)
29. The CDRs can only provide information like Caller ID duration and Cell Tower Details, however, they do not capture the substance of the conversation itself. These are the call record details, which are the metadata (data about data) about the call and the same is totally different from call recording, which offers direct evidence of the communication, including specific words spoken and ::: Downloaded on - 23/05/2026 10:01:52 :::CIS 31 2026:HHC:18110 context of the conversation, which can be crucial, for deciding the matter.
.
30. During the investigation, police has recorded the statement of Naresh Kumar Miglani, who allegedly was working with Samta Aggarwal (applicant). His statement was recorded on 23.01.2024, under Section 164 of Cr.P.C.
of As per his statement, on 12.09.2023, applicant Samta Aggarwal made a call to him directing him to hand over a rt carton sack to Sahil Goswami, upon which, he allegedly collected two cartons from Samta Aggarwal (applicant) at Roshanara Road and handed over those two cartons to Sahil Goswami. When this witness contacted Sahil Goswami on phone, he apprised him and requested him to hand over both the cartons to his servant Aman Kumar. He has, thereafter, handed over the cartons to Aman Kumar.
According to him, he is not aware about the contents of said cartons and he does not know to whom Aman Kumar had handed over those cartons. He further deposed that in the month of December, he received a call from Samta Aggarwal (applicant), allegedly disclosing that two cartons, which were handed over to Aman Kumar, were caught in ::: Downloaded on - 23/05/2026 10:01:52 :::CIS 32 2026:HHC:18110 Himachal and on the basis of those cartons, Sahil Goswami and Vishal Sharma, were arrested.
.
31. Although, at the stage of deciding the bail application, merits of the case should not be discussed by this Court, as, the same would cause prejudice to the case of the applicants or to the case of prosecution, but, when it of is incumbent upon this Court to record the findings, which should be more than prima facie findings, with regard to rt the satisfaction of the twin conditions, as enumerated under Section 37(i)(b)(ii) of the ND&PS Act, then, much relied document has to be considered by this Court.
32. As per the statement of Naresh Kumar Miglani, he was not aware about the contents, nor applicant Samta Aggarwal had allegedly told this witness in the month of December as to what were the contents of those cartons.
Merely stating that those two cartons were caught at Himachal and on the basis of the contents of the same Rishab Jain, Sahil Goswami and Vishal were arrested.
Nothing can be incriminated against applicant Samta Aggarwal. This witness has deposed about the contraband, in his concluding lines of statement, that the ::: Downloaded on - 23/05/2026 10:01:52 :::CIS 33 2026:HHC:18110 same contains Drugs. Meaning thereby, he was not aware about the contents nor Samta Aggarwal (applicant) .
allegedly told him about the contents of the same.
33. During investigation, police has also recorded the statement of Aman Kumar, who has categorically deposed that he received a call from Vishal Sharma, who of disclosed that one parcel is to be booked for Gagret, District Una. rtThe said parcel, as disclosed to him by Vishal Sharma, has been sent by his friend applicant Samta Aggarwal, containing medicines. Thereafter, applicant Samta Aggarwal made a Whatsapp call, disclosing therein, that one person Naresh will hand over the parcel of medicines at Bagirath Palace, Delhi. She has also allegedly requested him not to open the said parcel and she has also requested him to book the same for transportation. Vishal Sharma allegedly forwarded the invoice bill through Whatsapp. The parcel was allegedly handed over to him on 12.09.2023.
34. Much has been argued against the said statements, pointing out about the admissibility of the above statements, but, at the stage of deciding the bail ::: Downloaded on - 23/05/2026 10:01:52 :::CIS 34 2026:HHC:18110 application, detailed discussion of the evidence, so adduced by the prosecution, is not required, as the same .
would cause prejudice to the case of the prosecution, as well as, to the case of the accused. Applicant Samta Aggarwal has been booked under ND&PS Act case, in which, commercial quantity of contraband is involved.
of
35. Moreover, considering the stage of the trial, it would not be in the interest of justice to release the rt applicants on bail, as the apprehensions, which have been expressed by the police, in the status reports, to oppose the release of the applicants on bail, cannot be said to be unfounded. At the time of deciding the question of bail, a delicate balance between the individual liberty and larger interest of the society has to be maintained.
36. Moreover, both the statements of Aman Kumar and Naresh Kumar, cannot be ignored at this stage, to record the findings, in favour of the applicants, as per the provisions of Section 37(i)(b)(ii). At this stage, it cannot be said that the applicant Samta Aggarwal is not guilty of such offence and while on bail, she is not likely to commit any offence.
::: Downloaded on - 23/05/2026 10:01:52 :::CIS35 2026:HHC:18110
37. Both the applicants, in the present case, have also made a futile attempt to impress upon this Court to .
hold that their arrest is illegal on account of non furnishing of the grounds of arrest in writing. As per the bail application, applicant Samta Aggarwal was arrested on 18.07.2025, and applicant Bhupinder Datta, was arrested of on 15.09.2024, whereas, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in a case titled rtas "Mihir Rajesh Shah Vs State of Maharashtra & Anr., (2026) 1 Supreme Court Cases 500", which has been decided on November 6, 2025, has held as under: "68. We are cognizant that there existed no consistent or binding requirement mandating written communication of the grounds of arrest for all the offences. Holding as above, in our view, would ensure implementation of the constitutional rights provided to an arrestee as engrafted under Article 22 of the Constitution of India in an effective manner. Such clarity on obligation would avoid uncertainty in the administration of criminal justice. The ends of fairness and legal discipline therefore demand that this procedure as affirmed above shall govern arrest henceforth."
38. In view of the above, the arguments of learned counsel appearing for the applicants, qua the non compliance of provisions of Section 47 of BNSS, are not ::: Downloaded on - 23/05/2026 10:01:52 :::CIS 36 2026:HHC:18110 liable to be accepted and no benefit could be given to the applicants, on this ground.
.
39. In view of the discussions made above, there is not ground to accept the prayer, as made in the applications. Consequently, both the applications are dismissed.
of
40. Any of the observations, made hereinabove, shall not be taken as an expression of opinion, on the rt merits of the case, as these observations are confined, only, to the disposal of the present bail applications.
41. Copy of this order be placed in the connected case file i.e. Cr.MP(M) No. 414 of 2026.
42. Record be sent back immediately through special messanger, so as to reach the learned trial Court well before the date fixed before it, for PWs.
( Virender Singh ) Judge 19th May, 2026 (Pramod Kumar) ::: Downloaded on - 23/05/2026 10:01:52 :::CIS