Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 1823 (HP)

Arjun Singh v. State of Himachal Pradesh

2019-12-02

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. 194 of 2019, dated 11.09.2019, under Section 21 & 29 of the ND&PS 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 permanent resident of District Shimla 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 10.09.2019 a police team was on patrol duty at Dohri Diwal, Solan. At about 08:45 p.m. a pedestrian came from Badog side and Sub Inspector called him. The said pedestrian, on being called, started running towards the back side, so he was chased and overpowered. The nabbed person was carrying a bag and he disclosed his name as Arjun Singh (petitioner herein). Police associated an independent witness and in his presence the bag of the petitioner was checked. Police recovered a plastic pouch, which contained another plastic pouch stuffed with some small pieces of brownish substance. Upon being checked through drug detection kit, the recovered substance was found to be heroin weighing 39.42 grams. Thereafter, the police completed all the codal formalities. Police prepared the spot map and recorded the statements of the witnesses. The petitioner was arrested and during the course of interrogation the petitioner divulged that he is pursuing higher studies in Punjab University, Chandigarh. As per the petitioner he is a drug addict and he used to consume drugs with his friends. 4-5 months back he met one Sanjay Bhauriya (co-accused) at Panchkula, who used to sell heroin. The petitioner further disclosed that he purchased heroin from co-accused Sanjay Bhauriya 6-7 times and on 8/9th September, 2019, he purchased 40 grams heroin for Rs. 42,000/- from co-accused Sanjay Bhauriya. He paid in cash for 40 grams heroin and earlier he used to transact in the account of co-accused Sanjay Bhauriya. On 10.09.2019 he was going home for 2-3 months, so he kept heroin for self consumption. 42,000/- from co-accused Sanjay Bhauriya. He paid in cash for 40 grams heroin and earlier he used to transact in the account of co-accused Sanjay Bhauriya. On 10.09.2019 he was going home for 2-3 months, so he kept heroin for self consumption. Police interrogated about the co-accused and during the course of investigation it was unearthed that co-accused Sanjay Bhauriya used to purchase heroin from Nigerians at Delhi and he used to sell it at Punchkula. Police also obtained the bank records. On 12.09.2019 co-accused Sanjay Bhauriya was arrested and he disclosed that he has hidden 110 grams of heroin in his rented accommodation at Panchkula. He led the police party to his accommodation and got recovered heroin, which on weighment was found to be 95.98 grams. Police completed all the codal formalities and relevant recoveries were made. Sanjay Bhauriya disclosed that he used to purchase the heroin from a Nigerian at Uttam Nagar, Delhi. Police searched that Nigerian person, but he could not be traced. On chemical examination, the contraband recovered from the petitioner and that of co-accused was found to be the samples of Diacetylmorphine (Heroin). Call details of the petitioner and that of the co-accused revealed that they were in constant touch with each other. One more case is pending against co-accused Sanjay Bhauriya under the NDPS Act, where no case is pending against the petitioner. As per the police, after completion of investigation, challan stands presented in the learned Trial Court. Lastly, it is prayed that the bail application of the petitioner be dismissed, as the petitioner has committed a serious crime. In case the petitioner is enlarged on bail, at this stage, he may tamper with the prosecution evidence and may also flee from justice, so the bail application of the petitioner 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 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 permanent resident of 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 further argued that the petitioner is permanent resident of 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. The petitioner is a drug addict and not a drug peddler, so the petition may be allowed and the petitioner may be enlarged on bail. Conversely, the learned Additional Advocate General has argued that the petitioner has committed a serious crime and in case he is enlarged on bail, he may tamper with the prosecution evidence and may also flee from justice, so it is prayed that the bail application of the petitioner may 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 investigation is complete, challan stands presented in the Court and in the wake of the fact that the custody of the petitioner is not required by the police and the fact that the petitioner is a drug addict and not a drug peddler, 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 22 years of age, the fact that the petitioner had kept the contraband for his self consumption, the petitioner is a student and a drug addict, not a drug peddler, as nothing has come on record, which could show that the petitioner was dealing in sale of the contraband, the fact that the petitioner is permanent resident of District Shimla and neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice, considering the overall material, which has come on record, and without discussing the same at this stage, the petitioner is ready and willing to abide by the terms and conditions of bail, in case so granted, 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. 194 of 2019, dated 11.09.2019, under Section 21 & 29 of the ND&PS 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.