Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 309 (HP)

Digvijay v. State Of Himachal Pradesh

2020-06-05

CHANDER BHUSAN BAROWALIA

body2020
JUDGMENT Chander Bhusan Barowalia, J. - The present bail application, under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, has been maintained by the petitioner, for releasing him on bail, in case FIR No. 216/2019, dated 10.10.2019, under Section 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, registered at 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. Further, 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 and 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 10.10.2019, a police party headed by Inspector Naveen Jhalta were on petrolling duty at place Dohri Deewar (Solan). At about 12.20 A.M. (midnight) they saw a person, who was having a carry bag in his right hand, coming from left side of the road. On seeing the police party, the person got perplexed and when the police asked him to stop, he tried to run away from the spot. However, the police party has managed to nab him. Immediately after nabbing him, the police has stopped a vehicle bearing registration No. HP59-0538, which was being driven by Bhupender Jaggi and associated him as a witness in the present case. The police has also stopped other vehicles, however, no one was ready to become a witness in the case. Accordingly, Bhupender Jaggi and HC Virender Kumar were made witnesses in the case. In presence of these witnesses, the person disclosed his name as Digvijay Singh and when his bag was got checked, it was found containing a hanky, a Vivo mobile phone, a driving license and a polythene envelope. When the knot of said polythene envelope was untied, it was found containing Grey coloured substance, which was heroin/chitta. On weighment, the recovered contraband was found to be 19.72 grams. The police completed all the codal formalities on the spot and sent a rukka to police station for registration of FIR. Consequently, FIR No. 216/2019, dated 10.10.2019, under Section 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act came to be registered against the petitioner. 4. On weighment, the recovered contraband was found to be 19.72 grams. The police completed all the codal formalities on the spot and sent a rukka to police station for registration of FIR. Consequently, FIR No. 216/2019, dated 10.10.2019, under Section 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act came to be registered against the petitioner. 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 Himachal Pradesh and neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice and no fruitful purpose will be served by keeping the petitioner behind the bars for an unlimited period, so the bail application be allowed and the petitioner be enlarged on bail. On the other hand, 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. At this stage, taking into consideration the fact that the petitioner is permanent resident of Himachal Pradesh, also taking into consideration the recovered quantity of the contraband, i.e., 19.72 grams, the fact that the petitioner is neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice, considering the overall facts, which have come on record, and without discussing them at this stage, 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 the petitioner, who has been arrested by the police, in case FIR No. 216/2019, dated 10.10.2019, under Section 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, registered at 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. 7. In view of the above, the petition is disposed of.