Research › Search › Judgment

Uttarakhand High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 199 (UTT)

SUNDER SINGH BISHT v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

2013-04-11

Alok Singh

body2013
JUDGMENT Hon’ble Alok Singh, J. Mr. Hari Om Bhakuni, learned Brief Holder has handed over photocopies of the malkhana register as well as G.D. pertaining to Rapat Nos. 22, 24, 44 and 12 which are taken on record. He further submits that the documents, today handed over to the Court, were supplied by Sub-Inspector Bhoopal Ram. 2. By way of present application applicant is seeking regular bail in Case Crime/F.I.R. No. 18 of 2013, Under Section 18/20 N.D.P.S. Act, P.S. Banbasa, District Champawat. 3. Mr. A.K. Sah, learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. Perusal of the malkhana entries, so produced today in the Court, does not contain at what time contraband so recovered from the possession of the applicant was deposited in the malkhana on 29.09.2012. Entries of the malkhana register does not show that sample seal of the Arresting Officer was also deposited in the malkhana on 29.09.2012. Further malkhana register does not show at what time contraband and sample seal was taken out from the malkhana to be produced before the court along with the accused while seeking remand. On the malkhana register entries are pertaining to the departure of Constable Rajesh Kumar for seeking remand of the accused. 5. It is surprising as to how entries may be made in the malkhana register about the departure of the Constable Rajesh Kumar for seeking remand. 6. Mr. Hari Om Bhakuni, learned Brief Holder for the State submits that Rapat No. 22 dated 30.09.2012 reveals that constable Rajesh Kumar left the Thana along with contraband and accused, to seek remand. 7. Although, perusal of Rapat No. 22 dated 30.09.2012 also reveals that sample and seal was given to the constable Rajesh Kumar while taking the accused to the court for seeking remand. It is surprising entries about taking out the contraband from the malkhana are not made in the malkhana register. It is not understandable as to how contraband and sample seal came out from the malkhana on 30.09.2012 without there being any entry in the malkhana register. Even G.D. does not contain at what time contraband and sample seal was teken out from the malkhana. It is also not understandable as to how entries about the departure of the Constable which are supposed to be made in the G.D. are made in the malkhana register. 8. Even G.D. does not contain at what time contraband and sample seal was teken out from the malkhana. It is also not understandable as to how entries about the departure of the Constable which are supposed to be made in the G.D. are made in the malkhana register. 8. Perusal of the documents reveals that everything was hotchpotch and was not in order for which detail investigation is required. 9. Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, I direct, let applicant be enlarged on bail on furnishing his personal bond of ‘5,00,000/- and two sureties of the same like amount, to the satisfaction of Special Judge (N.D.P.S.), Champawat. 10. Copy of this order may be forwarded to D.I.G., Kumaun to constitute a team of two officers, not below the rank of Superintendent of Police, who shall peruse the entire documents pertaining to this case and shall take appropriate action against the guilty. 11. Bail application stands allowed accordingly.