The Himachal Pradesh High Court upheld the acquittal of three accused persons in a case involving the alleged recovery of 2.002 kg of charas under the NDPS Act, holding that a discrepancy in the colour of the tape used to seal the seized contraband raised doubts about the identity and safe custody of the case property.[1] The court noted that police witnesses said the contraband was wrapped in yellow tape when seized, but it was found wrapped in brown tape when opened before the Trial Court.[1] The Division Bench of Justice Vivek Singh Thakur and Justice Bhupesh Sharma remarked that the case property before sealing was wrapped with yellow tape, but on being opened in the court it contained two polythene packets wrapped with brown tape containing charas.[1] The case arose from an incident dated 26 December 2016, when a police team intercepted a Mahindra XYLO vehicle at Dohri Diwar near the Subathu bifurcation in Solan, Himachal Pradesh, acting on secret information about the transportation of narcotics.[1] During the search, the police allegedly recovered 2.002 kg of charas from a backpack kept between the legs of accused Kapil @ Dhillo, who was travelling in the vehicle with two other accused persons.[1] The three were subsequently charged under Sections 20 and 29 of the NDPS Act.[1]

The Special Judge, Solan, acquitted them on 10 September 2018, citing inconsistencies in the prosecution evidence, and the State challenged the acquittal before the Himachal Pradesh High Court.[1] The High Court observed that the prosecution failed to establish the recovery of charas from the conscious possession of the accused persons, as the two independent witnesses did not support the alleged recovery.[1] It further noted material contradictions in the testimonies of police officials regarding the receipt of secret information, recording of reasons of belief under Section 42(2) of the NDPS Act and the place where the backpack was searched.[1] The court also found discrepancies in the colour of the tape used to wrap the seized contraband and doubts regarding custody of the seal, raising questions about the identity and safe custody of the case property.[1] Holding that the trial court had taken a possible view based on the evidence, the High Court dismissed the State’s appeal and upheld the acquittal.[1] The decision is dated 29 October 2026.[1]