Himachal Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in NDPS Case Due to Procedural Lapses

Shiranjana Buddha Released on Bail After Prosecution Fails to Establish Conscious Possession and Proper Sampling Under NDPS Act

In a significant decision, the Himachal Pradesh High Court has granted bail to Shiranjana Buddha, a Nepali national, who was arrested under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (NDPS) for allegedly possessing a commercial quantity of opium. The court found that the prosecution failed to establish conscious possession of the contraband and did not comply with mandatory procedural requirements for sampling under the NDPS Act.

The petitioner was arrested on April 27, 2025, when the police intercepted a bus on its way from Solan to Shimla, acting on a tip-off. They allegedly found 2.544 kgs of opium near her and 5.640 kgs near her co-accused. However, the police failed to demonstrate that the petitioner had conscious possession of the contraband.

The High Court, presided over by Justice Rakesh Kainthla, observed that the prosecution's status report was silent on whether representative or homogeneous sampling was conducted, a critical procedural step under the NDPS Act. The court noted that all pouches of opium were mixed and weighed together, undermining the integrity of the sampling process.

The defense, represented by advocates Ajay Sipahiya and Tarun Mehta, argued that the petitioner was not informed of the grounds of her arrest and that the bags were found near her feet, with no direct connection to her. The court accepted this argument, emphasizing the lack of evidence for conscious possession.

Justice Kainthla also took into account the prolonged nature of the trial and the absence of any criminal antecedents against the petitioner. Given these circumstances, the court concluded that the rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, which makes bail provisions stringent, did not apply in this case.

The court allowed the bail petition, imposing several conditions, including the surrender of the petitioner's passport and regular attendance at trial proceedings. The petitioner is required to furnish a bail bond of ?1,00,000 with two sureties and must not intimidate witnesses or tamper with evidence.

This judgment is a reminder of the importance of adhering to procedural safeguards in NDPS cases, ensuring that the rights of the accused are protected while also maintaining the integrity of the judicial process.

Bottom Line:

Bail under NDPS Act - Bail granted as the prosecution failed to establish conscious possession of commercial quantity of opium and did not comply with the procedural requirements for sampling under the NDPS Act.

Statutory provision(s): Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 Sections 18, 29, 37

Shiranjana Buddha v. State of Himachal Pradesh, (Himachal Pradesh) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2812559