Two petitioners, Apurav Dhiman and Ankur Kunal Singh, filed separate bail petitions before the Himachal Pradesh High Court arising out of FIR No. 57 of 2026 registered at Police Station Palampur, District Kangra, for offences under Sections 21, 25, and 29 of the NDPS Act. The prosecution alleged that heroin was recovered from co-accused persons and that the petitioners were linked to the drug transactions solely on the basis of financial transfers — Kunal Singh had transferred ₹4,40,150/- and Apurav Dhiman had transferred ₹1,14,650/- to accounts of co-accused persons allegedly for the purchase of heroin; no contraband was directly recovered from the petitioners. The petitioners argued that the evidence against them was insufficient, the investigation was complete, and they were willing to abide by bail conditions, while the State opposed bail citing the harmful impact of heroin on society. The Court considered established Supreme Court principles on bail, including factors such as the nature of the charge, severity of punishment, prima facie evidence, and risk of tampering with witnesses, as laid down in cases like Pinki v. State of U.P. (2025) 7 SCC 314 and other precedents.