NDPS Act | Not Permissible To Detain Person On Presumption That Blood Sample May Indicate Presence Of Heroin: HP High Court Grants Bail

The Himachal Pradesh High Court has held that a person cannot be kept in custody merely on the assumption that the blood sample sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory might reveal traces of heroin or that some incriminating substance would be found.

Denying the State's submission that blood samples sent by the police to forensics were likely to indicate the presence of heroin, Justice Rakesh Kainthla remarked: “A person cannot be detained in custody based on the assumption that some incriminating substance would be found against him. The police have to connect the person with the commission of a crime before his detention can be justified.”

The petitioner filed a petition before the High Court seeking bail in an FIR, registered for the commission of offences involving possession of heroin and criminal conspiracy under Sections 21 & 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

The petitioner contended that the narcotics were recovered from the house of the co-accused, and he had no connection to the house. He claimed to be only a casual visitor, with no knowledge of the contraband allegedly kept beneath the mattress.

In response, the State contended that the petitioner and co-accused had confessed that they were heroin addicts and used to purchase contraband. Further, the samples of the petitioner and the co-accused were collected and sent to FSL for analysis. The result of which was still awaited.

The Court noted that according to the status report, the heroin and bundles of currency notes were kept beneath the mattress inside the room of the co-accused, and there was nothing to connect the petitioner to the offence, except for his presence at the house.

Further, the Court held that the state cannot rely on the statement made by the petitioner and the co-accused during the investigation as the confessions made to a police officer during the investigation are inadmissible under Section 25 of the Indian Evidence Act.

Thus, the Court allowed the bail application and held that a person cannot be detained in custody based on a mere assumption.

Case Name: Mahesh Thakur v/s State of H.P. & Ors.

Case No.: Cr. MP(M) No. 1706 of 2025

Date of Decision: 29.07.2025

For the Petitioner: Mr. Peeyush Verma, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Anuj Bali, Advocate.

For the Respondents: Mr. Jitender Sharma, Additional Advocate General, with HC Vinod Kumar, No.959, IO PS New Shimla, present with police record.

Click Here To Read/Download Order