Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 1428 (HP)

Ravi Kumar v. State of Himachal Pradesh

2019-09-23

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. 101 of 2019, dated 07.08.2019, under Section 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, registered in Police Station Dharampur, 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 the place 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 07.08.2019 a police party was on routine patrol duty at CHC Curve, near Police Station Dharampur. At about 09:10 a.m. a pedestrian was spotted coming towards Dharampur from Parwanoo side. On seeing police, he got baffled and started moving towards the side of the road. On suspicion, the said person was apprehended and independent witness, Shri Harish Kumar, was associated. The person apprehended by the police disclosed his name as Ravi Kumar (petitioner herein) and lunch box, being carried by him was checked and it was found containing a plastic pouch, which contained some substance. On being examined through DD Kit, the said substance was found to be heroin and it was 14.19 grams. Thereafter, the police completed all the codal formalities and a case was registered. Police recorded the statements of the witnesses and also prepared the spot map. The petitioner was arrested and medically examined. During the course of investigation and interrogation, the petitioner divulged that from some unknown driver he purchased the heroin. He consumed some heroin and hide the remaining heroin in his lunch box. Despite best efforts, the person from whom the petitioner allegedly purchased heroin could not be traced. The contraband was sent to SFSL, Junga, for forensic analysis and upon the receipt of the report, challan will be presented in the Court. As per the police, the petitioner is very clever person. Despite best efforts, the person from whom the petitioner allegedly purchased heroin could not be traced. The contraband was sent to SFSL, Junga, for forensic analysis and upon the receipt of the report, challan will be presented in the Court. As per the police, the petitioner is very clever person. Lastly, it is prayed that the bail application of the petitioner be dismissed, as the petitioner was found involved in a serious offence and there is possibility that in case at this stage he is enlarged on bail, he may flee from justice or tamper with the prosecution evidence. 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 report, 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 the petitioner is resident of the place and neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice. He has argued that no fruitful purpose will be served by keeping the petitioner behind the bars for an unlimited period, especially when the investigation is complete, the challan is likely to be presented in the learned Trial Court, so the bail application be allowed and the petitioner be enlarged on bail. 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, especially when the investigation is complete, challan is likely to be presented in the Court, so the application be allowed and the petitioner be enlarged on bail. 7. 6. In rebuttal the learned Counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner cannot be kept behind the bars for an unlimited period, especially when the investigation is complete, challan is likely to be presented in the Court, so the application be allowed and the petitioner be enlarged on bail. 7. At this stage, considering the age of the petitioner, who is only 31 years of age, the fact that it has come in the police investigation that the petitioner was keeping the contraband for his own use, the recovered quantity of the contraband, i.e.,14.19 grams, the petitioner is permanent resident of the place and neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice, custody of the petitioner is not at all required by the police, as the investigation is complete and the challan is likely to be presented in the Court very soon, 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. 101 of 2019, dated 07.08.2019, under Section 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, registered in Police Station Dharampur, 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.20,000/- (rupees twenty 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.