Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 1367 (HP)

Jagat Ram v. State of Himachal Pradesh

2017-12-12

CHANDER BHUSAN BAROWALIA

body2017
JUDGMENT : Chander Bhusan Barowalia, J. 1. The present bail application has been maintained by the petitioner under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking his release in case FIR No. 57 of 2016, dated 05.03.2016, under Sections 20, 25 and 29 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as ND&PS Act), registered at Police Station Kullu, District Kullu, H.P. 2. As per the petitioner, he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He is resident of the place and neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice, so he may be released on bail. 3. Police report stands filed. As per the prosecution, on 05.03.2016, the police personnel laid a nakka at place Shirad Pulli, near main road, Raisen, and at about 09:15 a.m. a vehicle came, which was stopped by its driver, on seeing the police. The driver and front passenger fled away in an orchard. One of the occupants sitting on the rear seat threw a black coloured bag and both of the occupants, sitting in the rear seat, tried to flee. Police nabbed both the persons and police personnel were sent to apprehend the persons who fled away, but they could not be apprehended. On being asked about the packet, which was thrown by them out of the vehicle, the persons, who were nabbed by the police, could not give any plausible answer. The police checked the bag and the same contained charas in the shape of sticks and chapattis. On weighment, total charas was found to be 5.650 kilo grams. Police completed all the codal formalities. Police recovered a bank pass book and documents of the vehicle and the persons nabbed disclosed that pass book and documents belong to Rajesh Kalsi, who is owner of the vehicle, and has fled away. They also disclosed that another person who has fled away is Kala from Naraingarh. They further disclosed that they purchased the contraband from one Pankaj of Village Vayasar. A case was registered and investigation ensued. All the persons traveling in the vehicle were arrested and the petitioner (Pankaj @ Jagat Ram) was arrested on 27.06.2017. At the first instance, the petitioner did not tell his correct name and he also moved a bail application with his name as Pankaj Thakur @ Panku. A case was registered and investigation ensued. All the persons traveling in the vehicle were arrested and the petitioner (Pankaj @ Jagat Ram) was arrested on 27.06.2017. At the first instance, the petitioner did not tell his correct name and he also moved a bail application with his name as Pankaj Thakur @ Panku. Later on he divulged that his correct name is Jagat Ram. Police collected the records qua the name of the petitioner, which revealed that correct name of the petitioner is Jagat Ram. As the petitioner misled the police by disclosing his wrong name Section 419 IPC was added against him in the case. As per the prosecution, challan stands presented in the Court and the case is listed for 19.12.2017 for evidence. Lastly, the prosecution prayed that the bail application of the petitioner be dismissed. 4. Heard. The learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner is innocent and he is neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice. He has further argued that the petitioner is resident of the place. He has argued that the petitioner was not named in the FIR and he was not involved in the instance case. He has argued that petitioner, being innocent, be released on bail. Conversely, the learned Additional Advocate General has argued that the documents on record clearly show that the petitioner was having more than one name and he was involved in the crime. He has further argued that taking into consideration the quantity of the recovered charas, which is more than five kilo grams, and also the role of the petitioner, he be not released on bail. 5. I have gone through the rival contentions of the parties and the police report in detail. 6. At this stage taking into consideration the fact that the quantity of the recovered contraband is commercial quantity, so the rigors of Section 37 of the ND&PS Act are applicable. 5. I have gone through the rival contentions of the parties and the police report in detail. 6. At this stage taking into consideration the fact that the quantity of the recovered contraband is commercial quantity, so the rigors of Section 37 of the ND&PS Act are applicable. After going through the material which has come on record, the Aadhar card of the petitioner, all other documents recovered by the police during the course of the investigation and also considering the quantity of the charas recovered and also the facts that the petitioner is in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence and also he is likely to flee from justice, in case released on bail in the present case, the judicial discretion to admit the petitioner on bail is not required to be exercised in his favour. Accordingly, the bail application, which sans merits, deserves dismissal and is accordingly dismissed.