Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 856 (HP)

Amrik Singh v. State of Himachal Pradesh

2015-07-09

TARLOK SINGH CHAUHAN

body2015
JUDGMENT : Tarlok Singh Chauhan, J. The petitioner has sought regular bail in FIR No. 66 of 2014 dated 4.7.2014 registered at Police Station, Kot Kehloor, District Bilaspur, under sections 15, 27A-61-85 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (for short: NDPS Act). The respondents have produced the records of investigation and have also placed on record the status report. 2. A perusal of the records of investigation shows that the allegations made against the accused are that on 3.7.2014 at about 8.00 p.m. at place Majari, he was found selling 1.200 Kgs. Poppy straw to Maninder Singh and 900 grams poppy straw to Satnam Singh. It was not in dispute that the samples of the so called poppy straw were sent for chemical examination to the State Forensic Science Laboratory, Junga, who have reported that “exhibits stated as poppy husk in cloth parcels marked in the laboratory as C & D are not the samples of poppy straw”. 3. The report, prima facie not only casts a shadow of doubt on the prosecution story but demolishes it and on the basis of such report, the liberty of the petitioner cannot be curtailed. 4. At this stage, the learned Deputy Advocate General would argue that petitioner is a menace to the society, as there are as many as 14 cases registered against the petitioner since the year 1990, which pertain to illegal possession of poppy straw, opium and liquor etc and therefore, he should not be released. 5. Suffice it to say that this contention is not available to the prosecution for the simple reason that this court is not dealing with the case of preventive detention but dealing with the case where the liberty of a person is at stake. Liberty is the most precious of all the human rights and all civilized countries have recognized this. The American Declaration of Independence, 1776, French Declaration of the rights of Men and the Citizen, 1789, Universal Declaration of Human Rights and International Covenant on Civil and Political Right, 1966 all speak with one voice that liberty is the natural and inalienable right of every human being. Similarly, Article 21 of the Constitution also provides that no one shall be deprived of his liberty except in accordance with the procedure prescribed by law. 6. Similarly, Article 21 of the Constitution also provides that no one shall be deprived of his liberty except in accordance with the procedure prescribed by law. 6. At the same time it also cannot be denied that just as liberty is precious for an individual so is the interest of society in maintaining law and order. Both are extremely important for the survival of civilized society and therefore, sometimes in the larger interest of public and the State it may become imperative to curtail the freedom of an individual, but then the same can only be done in accordance with law. 7. The mere fact that the petitioner is an accused in various other cases cannot be a ground to deny bail to him in the present case. It only needs to be reminded that personal liberty is the heart and soul of a citizen and Constitution, therefore, personal liberty can be cribbed, cabined, curtailed and confined only if the same be done in accordance with law. 8. In view of the aforesaid discussion, I find that this is to be a fit case where discretion of bail ought to be exercised in favour of the petitioner, who otherwise is a permanent resident of village Majari, District Bilaspur and there is hardly any chance of his fleeing from justice. 9. Accordingly, the petition is allowed and petitioner is ordered to be released on bail subject to the following conditions: (i) the petitioner shall furnish bail bonds in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur,H.P. (ii) it is clarified that the petitioner shall fully co-operate with the investigation; (iii) he shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence nor hamper the investigation of the case in any manner whatsoever; (iv) he shall not make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or the Police Officer; (v) he shall not leave the country without prior permission of the Court. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur is directed to comply with the directions issued by the High Court, vide communication No.HHC.VIG./Misc.Instructions/93-IV.7139 dated 18.03.2013. 9. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur is directed to comply with the directions issued by the High Court, vide communication No.HHC.VIG./Misc.Instructions/93-IV.7139 dated 18.03.2013. 9. Any observation made hereinabove shall not be taken as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case and the trial Court shall decide the matter uninfluenced by any observation made hereinabove.