IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr.MP(M). No. 661/2010. Date of Decision: 14.7.2010. _______________________________________________ Swaru Ram ….Petitioner. Versus. State of H.P. ….Respondent. Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dev Darshan Sud, Judge. Whether approved for reporting1?.No. For the petitioner :Mr.M.S.Guleria, Advocate. For Respondent. :Ms.Ruma Kaushik, Addl. Advocate General. Dev Darshan Sud, J.(Oral). This petition has been preferred by the petitioner under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of bail. The averments made are that a case under Section 29 of the Narcotic Drugs Psychotropic Sust2enance Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’) has been registered in Police Station, Kullu and F.I.R. No. 85 of 2010 dated 22.3.2003 has been registered. It is urged that nothing was recovered from the possession of the petitioner. Prior to the present application, the learned Special Judge, Kullu had dismissed the applications of the petitioner and other accused. The matter was gone into detail by the court below. Whether reporters of the Local papers are allowed to see the judgment?yes. 2 Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner relies upon two decisions of this Court in Cr.MP(M) No. 168 of 2010 titled Stynder Singh Vs. State of H.P. in support of his contention that bail can be granted for offences committed under the ‘Act’. Further reliance is placed on another judgment in Bittu Vs. State of H.P. 2009 (2) Cur.L.J. (H.P) 532. I have gone through both the judgments. It is trite that in the case of bail each judgment has to be confined to its own particular facts. What I find in the present petition is that the learned Sessions Judge has arrived at a conclusion that a prima facie case has been made out by the prosecution. I need not comment any further as whatever is determined here may influence the trial. In these circumstances, I find that after a prima facie case has been established before the trial Court, the petitioner cannot be admitted to bail. This petition, is therefore, dismissed. (Dev Darshan Sud), Judge. July 14,2010 (R)