Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 702 (HP)

Reena @ Naina v. State of Himachal Pradesh

2020-10-08

CHANDER BHUSAN BAROWALIA

body2020
JUDGMENT Chander Bhusan Barowalia, J. - The matter is taken up through video conference. 2. The present bail application has been maintained by the petitioner under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking her release, in the event of arrest, in case FIR No. 113 of 2020, dated 13.08.2020, under Sections 21 and 22 of the ND&PS Act, registered in Police Station Damtal, District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh 3. As per the averments made in the petition, the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. She 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. No fruitful purpose will be served by sending her behind the bars for an unlimited period, so she be released on bail. 4. Police report stands filed. As per the prosecution story, 12.08.2020, a police team was on patrol duty. At about 07:15 p.m., when the police team reached near place Fauji Pahadi, they spotted one Sukhdev @ Nanku, who was involved in an ND&PS case. Sukhdev, on seeing the police, threw a packet in the bushes and started scrambling. On suspicion, he was nabbed by the police and on being asked about the thrown packet, he seemed baffled. Police checked the packet thrown by him, which was stuffed with 600 Ridley capsules and on weighment the said capsules were 600 grams. Thereafter, the police completed all the codal formalities. Police prepared the spot map and recorded the statements of the witnesses. On personal search of the accused police recovered a packet from the pocket of the trousers of the accused, which was stuffed with heroin and on weighment it was found to be 6.96 grams. The accused was arrested and medically examined. Scientific samples were separated for forensic analysis. During the course of investigation, the accused divulged that he had purchased the contraband from one Naina (petitioner herein) for Rs. 25,000/- and he had paid Rs. 5,000/- to her. The call records also show the involvement of the petitioner in the alleged offence. During the course of investigation, it was unearthed that three more cases under the apt Sections of ND&PS are pending against the petitioner. It was also unearthed that accused Sukhdev has also been booked under the ND&PS Act in three more cases. 5,000/- to her. The call records also show the involvement of the petitioner in the alleged offence. During the course of investigation, it was unearthed that three more cases under the apt Sections of ND&PS are pending against the petitioner. It was also unearthed that accused Sukhdev has also been booked under the ND&PS Act in three more cases. As per the police, during the course of investigation, the petitioner absconded and later on she maintained the instant petition for bail. Lastly, it is prayed that the bail application of the petitioner be dismissed, as the petitioner is actively and continuously involved in sale/purchase of contraband. The petitioner, at this stage, in case enlarged on bail, may tamper with the prosecution evidence and may also flee from justice, so the bail application may be dismissed. 5. 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. 6. 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 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 sending the petitioner behind the bars for an unlimited period, especially when nothing remains to be recovered at the instance of the petitioner, the petitioner is a lady and her custody is not at all required by the police for interrogation, so the bail application may 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. He has further argued that the three more cases under the apt sections of ND&PS Act have been registered against the petitioner. The petitioner, time and again found involved in selling contraband, so in case the petitioner is enlarged on bail, at this stage, she may flee from justice or may tamper with the prosecution evidence. He has prayed that the bail application of the petitioner be dismissed. 7. The petitioner, time and again found involved in selling contraband, so in case the petitioner is enlarged on bail, at this stage, she may flee from justice or may tamper with the prosecution evidence. He has prayed that the bail application of the petitioner be dismissed. 7. In rebuttal the learned Counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner is a lady, nothing remains to be recovered at her instance, custody of the petitioner is not at all required by the police for further investigation, so the application be allowed and the petitioner be enlarged on bail. 8. At this stage, considering the quantity of contraband, which is intermediate quantity, the fact that the petitioner is a lady, considering the allegations against the petitioner in the instant case, the fact that no contraband was recovered from her, accused Sukhdev named the petitioner and on his allegations, a case was registered against her, the fact that the petitioner is permanent resident of the place, so she is neither in a position to flee from justice, nor in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence and also considering the fact that the petitioner is ready and willing to abide by the terms and conditions of bail, in case granted, considering the overall material, which has come on record, and without discussing the same at this stage, this Court finds that the present is a fit case where the judicial discretion to admit the petitioner on bail, in the event of her arrest, is required to be exercised in her favour. Accordingly, the petition is allowed and it is ordered that the petitioner, in the event of her arrest, by the police in case FIR No. 113 of 2020, dated 13.08.2020, under Sections 21 and 22 of the ND&PS Act, registered in Police Station Damtal, District Kangra, H.P., shall be released on bail forthwith in this case, subject to her furnishing personal bond in the sum of 50,000/- (rupees fifty 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. 9. In view of the above, the petition is disposed of. Copy dasti.