JUDGMENT : 1. Through the medium of instant application, the petitioner-Yashjeet alias Kalia alias Chachu S/o Sh. Chaman Lal R/o Searat, P/O Damtal, Tehsil Indora, District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh, at present lodged in District Jail, Jammu, seeks bail. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the accused was arrested on dated 24.10.2014 and is continuously in the judicial custody since then. During the course of judicial custody, the learned Court has recorded 29 witnesses and one witness has been given up namely Smt. Pushpa Devi, therefore, 10 are left out of 40 witnesses which are namely Sg.Ct Surinder Singh of Crime Branch, Jammu is a witness of seizure memo, Dr. Anita Gupta is Gynaecologist, GMC, Jammu is witness of post mortem report, Dr. Ruchi Khajuria is in Pathology Deptt. is a witness of post mortem report, Dr. Isha Pargal is a Forensic Medicine GMC, Jammu is a witness of post mortem report, Sh. Mool Raj, Scientific Officer, Biology/ Serology, FSL, Jammu is a witness of FSL report. Sh. Pawan Kumar Abrol is a Scientific Officer, FSL, Jammu is a witness of FSL report, Inspector Aejaz Ahmed Wani SHO, P/S Channi Himmat, Jammu is an investigating officer, Jeetan Ji Matoo Dy. SP (CRO) Crime Branch, Jammu is a Supervisory Officer and preparation of challan. Other witnesses which are recorded by the Ld. Court are either circumstantial witnesses or seizure memo witnesses but there is no direct or no circumstance witness which may implicate in any manner the applicant accused no. 3; that out of recorded witnesses so far no witness has stated anything against applicant which may be the basis of a conviction or does not inspire the confidence which may warrant ultimate conviction of the applicant accused no. 3. 3. The brief facts of the case are that on 10.10.2014, Police Station Channi Himmat, Jammu received information through telephone from Police Control Room Jammu to the effect that one girl namely Divya Manhas D/o Sh. Krishan Lal, R/o Marbel Market, Channi Himmat, Jammu was found in unconscious condition in front of the gate of her house. Since the girl did not regained her consciousness as such was taken to GMC, Hospital Jammu by her parents for treatment, but the doctors declared her as brought dead. Krishan Lal, R/o Marbel Market, Channi Himmat, Jammu was found in unconscious condition in front of the gate of her house. Since the girl did not regained her consciousness as such was taken to GMC, Hospital Jammu by her parents for treatment, but the doctors declared her as brought dead. Since the matter was pertaining to the death of a young girl in suspicious circumstance, as such, in order to verify the cause of death of deceased vide DD No. 26, dated 10.10.2014 proceedings u/s 174 Cr.PC were initiated by P/S Channi Himmat. During the course of inquest proceedings of the dead body of deceased was taken into possession from the mortuary room of GMC Hospital, Jammu. After receiving a letter from Addl. District Magistrate, Jammu, Principal GMC Jammu constituted board of four doctors for conducting the post mortem of deceased and subsequently the Medical Board of four doctors conducted the post mortem of deceased. Photography and videography of dead body was also conducted at GMC, Jammu by the officials of the Photography section of Crime Branch, Jammu. After Post Mortem the dead body of the deceased was handed over to her parents for last rites. Wearing apparels of deceased were also seized. The doctors after conducting the post mortem of deceased sent her Viscera and other slides to FSL, Jammu and Department of Pathology GMC, Jammu for chemical examination and report. Statements of witnesses were recorded u/s 175 Cr.P.C and suspects were interrogated. During the course of inquest proceedings the parents of deceased stated that deceased was addict of alcohol, Charas, Smack, Heroin etc. from last 2/3 years. The parents of deceased further deposed that about six months ago they noticed deceased roaming in intoxicated condition with Vikram Singh alias Vicku and Robail Sharma alias Chimpu, both of whom used to sell Heroin to the deceased. In this regard the mother of deceased many a times requested both the accused not to provide Heroin to the deceased. Thereafter, deceased was got treated by her parents from a Rehabilitation Centre, where she remained admitted for 11/12 months. When deceased got well her parents sent her to Chappial, Kangra (Himachal Pradesh) in the house of maternal grandparents of deceased, where she was admitted for undergoing BBA Course. Due to Dusshera Holidays the deceased came to Jammu on 02.10.2014. Thereafter, deceased was got treated by her parents from a Rehabilitation Centre, where she remained admitted for 11/12 months. When deceased got well her parents sent her to Chappial, Kangra (Himachal Pradesh) in the house of maternal grandparents of deceased, where she was admitted for undergoing BBA Course. Due to Dusshera Holidays the deceased came to Jammu on 02.10.2014. On 09.10.2014 deceased left her home on the pretext to meet her friend and told her mother that she will return back within half an hour, but when deceased did not come back after an hour her mother started searching for her. Meanwhile mother of the deceased came to know that her daughter is using a cell phone for which a SIM had been provided to her by one Manav R/o Ramban. The mother of the deceased contacted the said Manav who informed the mother of deceased that deceased is going to meet Vikram alias Vicku and Rubail Sharma alias Chimpu of Talab Tilloo for taking Heroin from them. Thereafter, the mother of deceased in search of deceased went to Talab Tilloo, but she could not trace the deceased or Vicku and Chimpu there. Thereafter, mother of the deceased and her other relatives tried to contact the deceased telephonically, but her mobile phone was found switch off. At about 2030 Hrs. the parents found deceased lying in front of gae of their house in unconscious state, and took her inside their house and served water and milk to her. The deceased regained her conscious for some time and told her parents that Vikram Singh alias Vicku and Robail Sharma both residents of Talab Tilloo, Jammu had given her heavy dosage of heroin as both of them were not happy over her quitting the drugs and feared that she might disclose their identity and may get them arrested by Police. When her health condition further deteriorated, she was taken to GMC Hospital, Jammu where doctors declared her as brought dead. During the course of inquest proceedings it was found that despite many requests by the mother of the deceased to Vikram Singh alias Vicku and Robail Sharma alias Chimpu not to provide Heroin to deceased, both of them in order to murder provided heavy dose of heroin to deceased, which caused her death. During the course of inquest proceedings it was found that despite many requests by the mother of the deceased to Vikram Singh alias Vicku and Robail Sharma alias Chimpu not to provide Heroin to deceased, both of them in order to murder provided heavy dose of heroin to deceased, which caused her death. Subsequently based on the above findings of inquest proceedings on 21.10.2014 the instant case u/s 32, 120-B Ranbir Penal code was registered in P/S Channi Himmat, Jammu. The investigation of case was conducted by Inspr. Aejaz Ahmed Wani SHO P/S Channi Himmat. Later on Sr. Superintendent of Police Jammu vide order No. CRB/14/43315-19/DPO, dated 27.10.2014 constituted a Special Investigation Team (SIT) headed by SP City South Jammu for investigation of the case. SDPO City East, Jammu and SHO P/S Channi Himmat, ASI Amar Chand of P/S Channi Himmat were nominated as the members of SIT. 4. That during the course of investigation, the I.O. seized the inquest file recorded the statement of some witnesses u/s 161 Cr.P.C and on 22.10.2014 arrested the accused (1) Vikram Singh, S/o Uttam Singh and (2) Robail Sharma, S/o Sh. Mansa Ram both residents of Talab Tillo, Jammu. During the course of investigation both the arrested persons were thoroughly interrogated/questioned. Some friends/known persons of deceased were also questioned; who on enquiry deposed that one Yashjit alias Kalia alias Chachu R/o Damtal is selling drugs to both Vikram Singh and Robail Sharma (Drug peddlers of Jammu). Even some drug addicts directly purchased Heroin from said Yashjit. Subsequently, on 24.10.2014 accused Yashjit alias Kalia alias Chachu S/o Searat, Damtal Tehsil Indora, Distt. Kangra (Himachal Pradesh) was also arrested in the case. During the course of investigation treatment file of deceased maintained by Help Rehabilitation Centre, Roop Nagar, Jammu where the deceased remained under treatment for de-addiction was seized. Call Detail Records of deceased and one accused were also obtained. Later on vide Police Headquarters J&K Jammu Order No. 2911 of 2014 dated 15.11.2014 the investigation of the case was transferred to Crime Branch, Jammu for further investigation and the same was entrusted to Dy. SP Jeetan Ji Matoo. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that there is no evidence to attract the provisions of NDPS Act which is self code and provides seizure provision, search provision, FSL procedure. SP Jeetan Ji Matoo. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that there is no evidence to attract the provisions of NDPS Act which is self code and provides seizure provision, search provision, FSL procedure. In the present case, it is all hypothetical, self imaginations and hoax of the prosecution just to display glory the commission offence which the prosecution ultimate failed. There is nothing on record to incriminate under NDPS Act to the applicant accused. Whereas in the present case out of 40 witnesses 29 witnesses are recorded, one witness is left over and only 10 PW remains to be recorded. The remaining 10 witnesses pertains to FSL report, postmortem report and 2 investigating officers. There is no eye witness in the case. Applicant accused Yashjeet is a resident of Damtal Himachal Pradesh and not even a single case registered or pending in any Court of law against him till date. Applicant does not know any other accused and moreover no witness could establish that Yashjeet Singh accused has any involvement. The applicant has been arrested and implicated in false case on extraneous considerations which is now proved by all recorded witnesses. The applicants innocence is established beyond any reasonable doubt, therefore, the applicant is entitled for Bail with regard to reaming period of the trial. In the said case, evidence recorded is full of contradictions and the entire prosecution evidence does implicate Yashjeet Singh, therefore, the Bail may be granted to the applicant. The entire prosecution story is full of contradictions and creates only doubts and nothing else. Whereas the prosecution has misused its powers and implicated falsely the applicant Yashjeet. Evidence of 30 witnesses has been recorded which does not spell even a single circumstance where in the applicant can be looked with even suspicion. Investigating officers misused the powers vested to them put the applicant to face the unwanted trial. Prosecution miserably failed to establish guilt against the applicant Yashjeet. Having powers to investigate crime does not amount to rope innocent persons too in the guise of investigation and book u/s 120-B R.P.C. Investigating Officer grossly misused the powers on extraneous considerations infact there is nothing in the evidence recorded by the Ld. Prosecution miserably failed to establish guilt against the applicant Yashjeet. Having powers to investigate crime does not amount to rope innocent persons too in the guise of investigation and book u/s 120-B R.P.C. Investigating Officer grossly misused the powers on extraneous considerations infact there is nothing in the evidence recorded by the Ld. Court, therefore, the applicant deserves Bail and shall remain present to get the 10 witnesses recorded, otherwise also if all such witnesses statement read as it is even then there is nothing on record to suggest that in what manner the applicant is connected with the commission of the offence; that earlier the parole for a brief period was granted to the applicant and the applicant surrendered well within time and subjected himself to the majesty of Law. By the continuous conduct in trial and parole the applicant deserves the concession of Bail as the applicant is inside the jail from the last more than 2.5 years. Applicant will not jump the conditions of bail but will co-operate with the trial to be concluded at the earliest. The learned Trial Court on 08.06.2017 has rejected the Bail application of the petitioner and has failed to appreciate the afore submitted grounds and has in a mechanical manner has rejected the application which has grave travesty of justice. 6. With afore mentioned submissions, learned counsel for the petitioner has prayed for grant of bail in favour of the applicant. 7. Mr. Sanjeev Padha, Govt. 6. With afore mentioned submissions, learned counsel for the petitioner has prayed for grant of bail in favour of the applicant. 7. Mr. Sanjeev Padha, Govt. Advocate, has opposed the bail application stating that the application is not maintainable as the applicant has not disclosed any fresh/change of circumstances or any legitimate ground warranting indulgence by this Hon’ble Court; that the petitioner is facing trial on a criminal charge, he has an opportunity to defend himself and to be acquitted of the charge in case prosecution fails to bring home his guilt; that applicant has been rightly arrested and charged in the case in accordance with the procedure established by law and is presently facing trial in FIR No. 88/2014 registered with P/S Channi Himmat, the challan was produced under section 302/120-B of Ranbir Penal code and 8/22 NDPS, there is incriminating evidence against the applicant to connect him with the crime, who along with other accused have committed murder, thereby rendering the society under horrifying stage, moreover the applicant is not entitled to the concession of bail as per the statutory law and if languishing in jail is in accordance with the procedure established by law. Those who are unruly and wayward, having no respect of law of the land and right of the other fellow human beings cannot seek indulgence of the Hon’ble Court for enforcement of their own rights, as such instant application does not merit consideration and needs outright rejection. That the liberty of the individual is precious and is to be zealously guarded by the Hon’ble Court, however such a protection cannot be absolute in every situation. The interest of the society and liberty of the individual has to be balanced. The case in hand is a fit one where collective interest of the community outweighs the right of the personal liberty of the applicant and granting of the bail impede not only the administration of justice but also is going to injure the public interest rather than to serve it, as such the instant application deserves to be rejected on this count also. The applicant cant be granted bail u/s 497 Cr.P.C. as offences of which applicant/accused is charged are punishable with death or life imprisonment. The applicant cant be granted bail u/s 497 Cr.P.C. as offences of which applicant/accused is charged are punishable with death or life imprisonment. That in case application of the applicant is allowed there is every apprehension of winning over of the PWs by the applicant, as applicant being in a position to influence any further witness in the case, moreover there is every apprehension of applicant/ accused jumping the bail. The trial has also almost come to an end, the present application for enlarging applicant on bail thus deserves to be rejected. The trial court has shown absolute justified concern in rejecting the request of applicant for bail. The learned trial Court has rightly observed that it is well settled law that evidence led by the prosecution so far cannot be appreciated or even discussed minutely at this stage for consideration of plea of bail as it would definitely prejudice the parties. It is further submitted that as per the stand taken by the applicant that some of the witnesses examined by the prosecution have not supported prosecution story, in reply. That still few material witnesses remain to be examined and in the given circumstances, the applicant is not entitled to the concession of bail in such heinous offences. The applicant along with other accused has been charged that he used to supply drugs to people including PW and victim also, as deceased wanted to give up the habit of use of drugs but applicant/ accused apprehending his exposure conspired with other accused person to eliminate her by overdosing. That the trial is in progress, the prosecution witnesses whose evidence has been led by the prosecution before the Learned trial Court at this stage cannot be appreciated as other remaining prosecution witnesses are still to be examined in the said case and they may improve their statement in support of the prosecution case, as such at this stage there is no reason to say that applicant has not committed the offence of which the applicant is charged. Moreover, there is every apprehension of tampering with the prosecution witnesses by the applicant in case the applicant is granted bail. The case of the prosecution is not as there is nothing on record against the accused, evidence of the prosecution witnesses at this stage of granting bail cannot be appreciated. Moreover, there is every apprehension of tampering with the prosecution witnesses by the applicant in case the applicant is granted bail. The case of the prosecution is not as there is nothing on record against the accused, evidence of the prosecution witnesses at this stage of granting bail cannot be appreciated. It is prayed that keeping in view the submissions made herein above, the application of the applicant may kindly be dismissed at this stage being premature, in order to meet the ends of justice. 8. Heard learned counsel for both sides and considered the law on the subject. 9. From the perusal of record, it is evident that petitioner is facing trial in offences u/s 302/120-B Ranbir Penal code and 8/22 NDPS Act alongwith two more accused.. The accusation against petitioner is that he has been engaged in illegal sale of drugs and on 9.10.2014 on his instance, the co-accused Vikramjeet Singh and Rubal Sharma with intention to kill deceased Divya Manhas administered excessive dose of Heroin, resulting her death. The accusation is, thus, severe and the punishment for offence u/s 302 Ranbir Penal code is death or life imprisonment and for 8/22 of NDPS Act is 10 years and fine of Rs.one lakh. By the act of accused persons including petitioner herein, a girl has died due to overdose of Heroin. The drug menace has clearly ruined the young generations especially students. The accused in such cases has to be dealt with iron hand. 10. Learned counsel for petitioner while arguing the matter has stated that there is nothing incriminating against the petitioner herein produced by prosecution till today; he has also read over statements of witnesses recorded during course of trial and brought to the knowledge of court certain contradiction, embellishment and improvement. He has also argued and placed on record statements of witnesses recorded u/s 161 Cr.P.C. of left over witnesses. 11. I have gone through these statements for limited purpose for considering the bail petition along with other attending circumstances of case. The trial is at mid stage and as per Govt. Advocate, material witnesses are yet to be examined. Now law is settled that conviction can be based of solitary witness, if it inspires confidence of court; detail appreciation of evidence cannot be done at the time of considering the bail in heinous offence. The trial is at mid stage and as per Govt. Advocate, material witnesses are yet to be examined. Now law is settled that conviction can be based of solitary witness, if it inspires confidence of court; detail appreciation of evidence cannot be done at the time of considering the bail in heinous offence. The Prosecution has based its case on direct as well circumstantial evidence; in case any link in chain is snapped then whole case can become doubtful. The grounds taken in the petition and arguments advanced by counsel for petitioner may be good grounds for acquittal, but not for granting bail. Further once an accused is charge sheeted under offence, which carries capital punishment, then there is less chance of bail in mid trial stage, unless Court comes to the conclusion that there are reasonable grounds to believe that accused has not committed any offence. 12. In present case, after giving my legal thought on pleadings and evidence on record, I do not find any reasonable ground to believe that accused has not committed any offence, for which, he has been charged by the trial Court. Hence, this petition is dismissed at this stage.