Supreme Court – Daily Orders
Aakash Mahajan vs State Of Himachal Pradesh on 11 March, 2026
Author: Dipankar Datta
Bench: Dipankar Datta
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. /2026
[Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.13917/2025]
AAKASH MAHAJAN APPELLANT
VERSUS
STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH RESPONDENT
WITH
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. /2026
[Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.1096/2026]
ASHOK KUMAR APPELLANT
VERSUS
STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH RESPONDENT
ORDER
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. /2026 @ SLP (Crl.)
No.13917/2025
1. Leave granted.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed by
MANIK KUMAR
Date: 2026.03.12
17:47:31 IST
Reason: 1
2. The High Court of Himachal Pradesh at
Shimla, by the impugned judgment and order
dated 25th April, 2025, has rejected the
appellant’s prayer for bail.
3. Appellant, figuring as an accused in FIR
No.0103 of 2024 dated 09th September, 2024
registered at Police Station Chowari, District
Chamba, Himachal Pradesh under Sections 22,
25 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and
Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, was arrested
on 09th September, 2024.
4. Allegation against the appellant is that he
was seated in a car upon search whereof there
was recovery of contraband of commercial
quantity.
5. Appellant suffered incarceration till 19th
December, 2025, when we granted him interim
bail.
6. We have heard learned counsel for the
parties.
2
7. It is not in dispute that the trial is in
progress with evidence of 8 out of the 20
witnesses the prosecution wishes to examine to
drive home the charges against the appellant
having been recorded.
8. There is some dispute as to whether the
quantity of contraband recovered is commercial
or intermediate.
9. Be that as it may, since the appellant does
not have any criminal antecedent coupled with
the facts that the appellant has not misused the
concession of interim bail and that the trial is
likely to take some time to conclude, we are of
the considered opinion that the interim bail
granted to him ought to be made absolute.
Ordered accordingly.
10. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned
judgment and order.
3
11. Appellant shall continue to remain on bail
on terms and conditions already fixed by the trial
court.
12. Needless to observe, the appellant shall not,
directly or indirectly, by making inducement,
threat or promise, dissuade any person
acquainted with the facts of the case from
disclosing such facts to the court.
13. In the event there is any breach of the
terms and conditions for grant of bail, the trial
court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of the
appellant.
14. It is also ordered that the appellant shall
diligently attend proceedings of the trial, unless
exempted. If he abstains from attending the
proceedings without justifiable cause, that could
also be seen as breach of the conditions for
grant of bail and the trial court will be free to
pass appropriate orders.
4
15. We clarify that the observations made in
this order and grant of bail will not be treated as
findings on the merits of the case.
16. The appeal is, accordingly, allowed on the
aforesaid terms.
17. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand
disposed of.
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. /2026 @ SLP (Crl.)
No.1096/2026
18. Leave granted.
19. The High Court of Himachal Pradesh at
Shimla, by the impugned judgment and order
dated 25th April, 2025, has rejected the
appellant’s prayer for bail.
20. Appellant, figuring as an accused in FIR
No.0103 of 2024 dated 09th September, 2024
registered at Police Station Chowari, District
Chamba, Himachal Pradesh under Section 22, 25
and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic
5
Substances Act, 19851, was arrested on 09th
September, 2024.
21. We have perused the counter affidavit filed
by the respondent-State of Himachal Pradesh. It
is averred therein that the appellant figures as
an accused in one more First Information Report
(FIR). However, the particulars thereof are not
available.
22. We have heard learned counsel for the
parties.
23. Responding to our query, learned counsel
for the appellant submits that the other FIR in
which the appellant figures as an accused is
registered inter alia under Section 323 of the
Indian Penal Code, 1860. He makes a categorical
statement that the appellant is not involved in
any offence under the NDPS Act.
1 NDPS Act
6
24. Taking an overall view of the matter, we are
of the considered opinion that further detention
of the appellant pending trial is not necessary;
and, since the appeal deserves acceptance, the
appellant may be admitted to an order for grant
of bail.
25. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned
judgment and order.
26. Appellant shall be released on bail, subject
to furnishing of bail bonds to the satisfaction of
the trial court and subject to such other terms
and conditions as may be imposed by it.
27. Needless to observe, the appellant shall not,
directly or indirectly, by making inducement,
threat or promise, dissuade any person
acquainted with the facts of the case from
disclosing such facts to the court.
28. In the event there is any breach of the
terms and conditions for grant of bail, the trial
court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of the
7
appellant.
29. It is also ordered that the appellant shall
diligently attend proceedings of the trial, unless
exempted. If he abstains from attending the
proceedings without justifiable cause, that could
also be seen as breach of the conditions for
grant of bail and the trial court will be free to
pass appropriate orders.
30. We clarify that the observations made in
this order and grant of bail will not be treated as
findings on the merits of the case.
31. Finally, we clarify that if the prosecution
finds the statement made before us by learned
counsel for the appellant (recorded in paragraph
23 supra) is erroneous, it shall be free to seek
recall of this order upon notice to the appellant.
32. The appeal is, accordingly, allowed on the
aforesaid terms.
8
33. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand
disposed of.
……………………………………..J.
(DIPANKAR DATTA)
……………………………………..J.
(SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA)
New Delhi;
March 11, 2026.
9
ITEM NO.1 COURT NO.8 SECTION II-C
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.)
No.13917/2025
[Arising out of impugned final judgment and order
dated 25-04-2025 in CRMPM No.2904/2024 passed by
the High Court of Himachal Pradesh at Shimla]
AAKASH MAHAJAN Petitioner
VERSUS
STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Respondent
I.A. No.208449/2025-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF
THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT
I.A. No.208451/2025-EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.
I.A. No.243341/2025-PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL
DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ ANNEXURES
I.A. No.208455/2025-PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL
DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ ANNEXURES
WITH
SLP(Crl) No.1096/2026 (II-C)
I.A. No.3759/2026-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING
I.A. No.3762/2026-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE
IMPUGNED JUDGMENT
I.A. No.3766/2026-EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.
Date : 11-03-2026 These matters were called on for
hearing today.
CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPANKAR DATTA
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA
10
For Petitioner(s) :Mr. Ajay Marwah, AOR
Mr. Swaropopand Mishra, Adv.
Mr. Swaroopanad Mishra, Adv.
Mr. Mrigank Bhardwaj, Adv.
Mr. Mrigank Bhardwaj,, Adv.
Ms. Dhriti Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Rahul Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Ravideep Badyal, Adv.
For Respondent(s) :Mr. Varinder Kumar Sharma, AOR
Mr. Y K. Prasad, Adv.
Mr. Bishan Dass, Adv.
Mr. S. C. Juneja, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made
the following
O R D E R
1. Leave granted.
2. The appeals are allowed in terms of the signed order.
3. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
(MANIK KUMAR) (SUDHIR KUMAR SHARMA)
SENIOR PERSONAL ASSISTANT COURT MASTER (NSH)
11