Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. Cr. M.P.(M) No.1426 of 2010 Dated of Decision: December 28, 2010. Vipin Kumar. …..… Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. …….. Respondent. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surinder Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner : Mr. Dharamvir Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondent : Mr. A.K. Bansal, Additional Advocate General. Surinder Singh, J (oral): 1. Petitioner was arrested alongwith his co- accused Rajesh Kumar and Bishan Singh in case FIR No.53/10, registered on 28.2.2010 in Police Station Indora, District Kangra, H.P., for the offences punishable under Sections 21,22, 27-A and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act and Sections 186, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code, as they were found traveling in a Car bearing registration No.HP-54-9200, during the 2 ‘Naqa-bandi’ by the police and recovered 6720 capsules of Spasmo Proxyvon, 1390 capsules of Parvon Spas and 19 bottles (100 Ml each) of Corex. 2. As per the report of chemical analysis, psychotropic substance Dextropropoxyphene Napsylate was found to be 99.988 mg per capsule in Spasmo Proxyvon and 65.03 mg per capsule of Dextropropoxyphene hydrochloride in Parvon Spas and also Codeine phosphate was found to be 2.00 mg per/ ml in 100 ml bottle of Corex cough syrup, which fell in “commercial quantity”. 3. Notice of this application was given to the State. They filed their report and objected to the release of the petitioner on bail. It is also stated that the challan against the accused persons has been filed in the trial Court, which is fixed for consideration of charge in the first week of January, 2011 before learned Additional Sessions Judge (II), Kangra at Dharamshala. 4. Keeping in view the quantity recovered and non-explanation of the petitioner travelling with the other co-accused in the car in question goes 3 against his innocence as such bail to the present petitioner is not available, hence dismissed. 5. However, any observation made hereinabove shall have no effect on the merits of the main case. 6. Application stands disposed of. December 28, 2010. (Surinder Singh) (Pds) Judge.