Himachal Pradesh High Court
CRMPM/1515/2026 of ATUL BHATTI Vs STATE OF HP on 21 August 2026
HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr.MP(M) No.1515 of 2026 Date of Decision: 21.08.2026 _____________________________________________________________________ Atul Bhatti ……...Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr.MP(M) No.1515 of 2026
Date of Decision: 21.08.2026 _____________________________________________________________________ Atul Bhatti
……...Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh
…....Respondents
Coram
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?
For the Petitioner: Mr. Goldy Kumar, Advocate.
For the Respondent: Mr. Vishal Panwar, Additional Advocate General, with Mr. Ravi Chauhan and Mr. Anish Banshtu, Deputy Advocates General, for State.
___________________________________________________________________________
Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral)
Respondent-State has filed status report, perusal whereof reveals that in past, two cases under the NDPS Act already stand registered against him and in the present FIR, he was apprehended with 6.74 grams of chitta/heroin. Report further reveals that out of 16 prosecution witnesses, 6 witnesses have already been examined and for recording the statements of the remaining witnesses, learned trial Court has fixed the matter for 02.09.2026.
2. Since the trial is nearing completion, coupled with the fact that petitioner herein is accused of heinous crime punishable under Section 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, having adverse impact upon the society, this Court is not
2 persuaded to consider the prayer made on behalf of the petitioner for grant of bail.
3. Faced with aforesaid situation, learned counsel representing the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the present petition at this stage with liberty to file afresh, at appropriate stage, if required and desired. Ordered accordingly.
4. Having taken note of the fact that bail-petitioner is behind bars since 06.03.2026 and trial is nearing completion, this Court hopes and trusts that the Court below would make all out efforts to conclude the trial expeditiously, preferably, on or before 31.10.2026, failing which this Court shall be constrained to consider prayer made by the petitioner for bail on the ground of inordinate delay in conclusion of trial. Learned Additional Advocate General undertakes to render proper assistance on behalf of the prosecution, enabling the Court below to conclude the trial in terms of instant order passed by this Court. Needless to say, this Court on judicial as well as administrative sides, has been repeatedly advising the Courts below to conclude the trial of undertrials on topmost priority so that their freedom is not curtailed for an indefinite period. Registry is directed to apprise the Court below with regard to passing of the instant order.
August 21, 2026
(Sandeep Sharma), Rajeev Raturi
Judge