Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 1257 (HP)

Rahul Chauhan v. State Of Himachal Pradesh

2019-08-30

CHANDER BHUSAN BAROWALIA

body2019
JUDGMENT : Chander Bhusan Barowalia, J. 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. 166 of 2019, dated 15.08.2019, under Sections 21 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, registered in Police Station Sadar, Solan, District Solan, H.P. 2. As per the averments made in the petition, the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He is resident of Himachal Pradesh and neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice. No fruitful purpose will be served by keeping him behind the bars for an unlimited period, so he be released on bail. 3. Police report stands filed. As per the prosecution story, on 15.08.2019 a police team was on patrol duty towards Saproon, Vegetable Market, Chambaghat etc. and when at about 04:00 p.m. they were present near the Gate of Vegetable Market, police got a secret tip off that one Chetan Nainta, who is present in his rented accommodation at Chamunda Colony, Near Kather, alongwith one Vikram Kumar, is dealing in sale and purchase of chitta (heroin). Police formed a raiding party and also associated one independent witness, Shri Kanwar Raj. On being knocked, accused Chetan Nainta opened the door and he disclosed his name as Chetan Nainta. One more person was inside the room, who disclosed his name as Vikram Kumar (co-accused). Police party offered their search and accused Chetan Nainta himself searched the officials of the raiding party. Thereafter, the police conducted the search of the accommodation and recovered an electronic weighing scale and chitta (heroin). On weighment, the recovered contraband was found to be 7.36 grams. Thereafter, the police conducted all the codal formalities. Police clicked the photographs and also videographed the proceedings. Rukka was sent to the police station, whereupon FIR was registered. A spot map was prepared and the statements of the witnesses were recorded. Accused Chetan Nainta and Vikram were arrested. During the course of interrogation and investigation accused Chetan Nainta divulged that on 12/13.08.2019 when he went to Delhi for procuring heroin one Rahul Chauhan (petitioner) was with him. He has further divulged that the petitioner purchased the heroin from one Nigerian at Delhi and when they returned, they divided the contraband. Accused Chetan Nainta and Vikram were arrested. During the course of interrogation and investigation accused Chetan Nainta divulged that on 12/13.08.2019 when he went to Delhi for procuring heroin one Rahul Chauhan (petitioner) was with him. He has further divulged that the petitioner purchased the heroin from one Nigerian at Delhi and when they returned, they divided the contraband. Thereafter, the police procured the call details, which revealed that the petitioner accompanied accused Chetan Nainta. The petitioner was arrested on 16.08.2019 and he, during the course of investigation, revealed that he alongwith accused Chetan Nainta purchased the heroin from one Nigerian at Delhi. Lastly, it is prayed that the bail application of the petitioner be dismissed, as the petitioner was involved in a serious crime. There is possibility that in case at this stage the petitioner is enlarged on bail, he may flee from justice. The petitioner can also tamper with the prosecution evidence, so his application be dismissed. 4. I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned Additional Advocate General for the State and gone through the record, including the police reports, carefully. 5. The learned Counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has further argued that petitioner is permanent resident of Chopal, District Shimla, and neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice. He has further argued that no fruitful purpose will be served by keeping the petitioner behind the bars for an unlimited period. He has argued that only on the premise of bald allegations the police arrested the petitioner and nothing was recovered from him. Keeping in view age of the petitioner and all the facts and circumstances, which have emerged in the police investigation, the bail application be allowed. Conversely, the learned Additional Advocate General has argued that the petitioner was found involved in a serious offence, so at this stage, in case he is enlarged on bail, he may tamper with the prosecution evidence and may also flee from justice. He has prayed that the bail application of the petitioner be dismissed. 6. In rebuttal the learned Counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner cannot be kept behind the bars for an unlimited period, so the application be allowed and the petitioner be enlarged on bail. 7. He has prayed that the bail application of the petitioner be dismissed. 6. In rebuttal the learned Counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner cannot be kept behind the bars for an unlimited period, so the application be allowed and the petitioner be enlarged on bail. 7. At this stage, considering the age of the petitioner, the allegations against the petitioner that he has accompanied co-accused Chetan Nainta to Delhi for procuring heroin and the petitioner has taken 8 grams of heroin from accused Chetan Nainta for his personal use, the fact that recovery of contraband was effected from the accommodation of accused Chetan Nainta and recovered contraband was 7.36 grams, the fact that petitioner was arrested only on the statement of accused Chetan Nainta, the petitioner kept 8 grams of heroin with him out of 30 grams for his personal use and also considering the facts that the petitioner is permanent resident of Chopal, District Shimla, he is neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice, the petitioner is ready and willing to abide by the terms and conditions of bail, if so granted, considering the overall facts, which have come on record, and without discussing the same at this stage and also the fact that the petitioner cannot be kept behind the bars for an unlimited period, so this Court finds that the present is a fit case where the judicial discretion to admit the petitioner on bail is required to be exercised in his favour. Accordingly, the petition is allowed and it is ordered that the petitioner, who has been arrested by the police, in case FIR No. 166 of 2019, dated 15.08.2019, under Sections 21 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, registered in Police Station Sadar, Solan, District Solan, H.P., shall be released on bail forthwith in this case, subject to his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (rupees twenty five thousand) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court. The bail is granted subject to the following conditions: (i) That the petitioner will appear before the learned Trial Court/Police/authorities as and when required. (ii) That the petitioner will not leave India without prior permission of the Court. The bail is granted subject to the following conditions: (i) That the petitioner will appear before the learned Trial Court/Police/authorities as and when required. (ii) That the petitioner will not leave India without prior permission of the Court. (iii) That the petitioner will not directly or indirectly 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 Investigating Officer or Court. 8. In view of the above, the petition is disposed of. JUDGMENT : Chander Bhusan Barowalia, J. 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. 166 of 2019, dated 15.08.2019, under Sections 21 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, registered in Police Station Sadar, Solan, District Solan, H.P. 2. As per the averments made in the petition, the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He is resident of Himachal Pradesh and neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice. No fruitful purpose will be served by keeping him behind the bars for an unlimited period, so he be released on bail. 3. Police report stands filed. As per the prosecution story, on 15.08.2019 a police team was on patrol duty towards Saproon, Vegetable Market, Chambaghat etc. and when at about 04:00 p.m. they were present near the Gate of Vegetable Market, police got a secret tip off that one Chetan Nainta, who is present in his rented accommodation at Chamunda Colony, Near Kather, alongwith one Vikram Kumar, is dealing in sale and purchase of chitta (heroin). Police formed a raiding party and also associated one independent witness, Shri Kanwar Raj. On being knocked, accused Chetan Nainta opened the door and he disclosed his name as Chetan Nainta. One more person was inside the room, who disclosed his name as Vikram Kumar (co-accused). Police party offered their search and accused Chetan Nainta himself searched the officials of the raiding party. Thereafter, the police conducted the search of the accommodation and recovered an electronic weighing scale and chitta (heroin). On weighment, the recovered contraband was found to be 7.36 grams. Thereafter, the police conducted all the codal formalities. Police party offered their search and accused Chetan Nainta himself searched the officials of the raiding party. Thereafter, the police conducted the search of the accommodation and recovered an electronic weighing scale and chitta (heroin). On weighment, the recovered contraband was found to be 7.36 grams. Thereafter, the police conducted all the codal formalities. Police clicked the photographs and also videographed the proceedings. Rukka was sent to the police station, whereupon FIR was registered. A spot map was prepared and the statements of the witnesses were recorded. Accused Chetan Nainta and Vikram were arrested. During the course of interrogation and investigation accused Chetan Nainta divulged that on 12/13.08.2019 when he went to Delhi for procuring heroin one Rahul Chauhan (petitioner) was with him. He has further divulged that the petitioner purchased the heroin from one Nigerian at Delhi and when they returned, they divided the contraband. Thereafter, the police procured the call details, which revealed that the petitioner accompanied accused Chetan Nainta. The petitioner was arrested on 16.08.2019 and he, during the course of investigation, revealed that he alongwith accused Chetan Nainta purchased the heroin from one Nigerian at Delhi. Lastly, it is prayed that the bail application of the petitioner be dismissed, as the petitioner was involved in a serious crime. There is possibility that in case at this stage the petitioner is enlarged on bail, he may flee from justice. The petitioner can also tamper with the prosecution evidence, so his application be dismissed. 4. I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned Additional Advocate General for the State and gone through the record, including the police reports, carefully. 5. The learned Counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has further argued that petitioner is permanent resident of Chopal, District Shimla, and neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice. He has further argued that no fruitful purpose will be served by keeping the petitioner behind the bars for an unlimited period. He has argued that only on the premise of bald allegations the police arrested the petitioner and nothing was recovered from him. Keeping in view age of the petitioner and all the facts and circumstances, which have emerged in the police investigation, the bail application be allowed. He has argued that only on the premise of bald allegations the police arrested the petitioner and nothing was recovered from him. Keeping in view age of the petitioner and all the facts and circumstances, which have emerged in the police investigation, the bail application be allowed. Conversely, the learned Additional Advocate General has argued that the petitioner was found involved in a serious offence, so at this stage, in case he is enlarged on bail, he may tamper with the prosecution evidence and may also flee from justice. He has prayed that the bail application of the petitioner be dismissed. 6. In rebuttal the learned Counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner cannot be kept behind the bars for an unlimited period, so the application be allowed and the petitioner be enlarged on bail. 7. At this stage, considering the age of the petitioner, the allegations against the petitioner that he has accompanied co-accused Chetan Nainta to Delhi for procuring heroin and the petitioner has taken 8 grams of heroin from accused Chetan Nainta for his personal use, the fact that recovery of contraband was effected from the accommodation of accused Chetan Nainta and recovered contraband was 7.36 grams, the fact that petitioner was arrested only on the statement of accused Chetan Nainta, the petitioner kept 8 grams of heroin with him out of 30 grams for his personal use and also considering the facts that the petitioner is permanent resident of Chopal, District Shimla, he is neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice, the petitioner is ready and willing to abide by the terms and conditions of bail, if so granted, considering the overall facts, which have come on record, and without discussing the same at this stage and also the fact that the petitioner cannot be kept behind the bars for an unlimited period, so this Court finds that the present is a fit case where the judicial discretion to admit the petitioner on bail is required to be exercised in his favour. Accordingly, the petition is allowed and it is ordered that the petitioner, who has been arrested by the police, in case FIR No. 166 of 2019, dated 15.08.2019, under Sections 21 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, registered in Police Station Sadar, Solan, District Solan, H.P., shall be released on bail forthwith in this case, subject to his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (rupees twenty five thousand) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court. The bail is granted subject to the following conditions: (i) That the petitioner will appear before the learned Trial Court/Police/authorities as and when required. (ii) That the petitioner will not leave India without prior permission of the Court. (iii) That the petitioner will not directly or indirectly 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 Investigating Officer or Court. 8. In view of the above, the petition is disposed of.