Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 827 (HP)

Abhi Katoch v. State of Himachal Pradesh

2020-11-11

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 his release, in case FIR No. 232 of 2020, dated 10.08.2020, under Section 21 of the ND&PS Act, registered in Police Station Nurpur, 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. He 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 keeping him behind the bars for an unlimited period, so he be released on bail. 4. Police report stands filed. As per the prosecution story, on 10.08.2020 a police team had laid a nakka at Kandyal Barrier and at about 05:05 p.m. police stopped a car, having registration No. HP62A-0006 and the documents of the same were being checked. The driver of the aforesaid vehicle turned perplex, so upon suspicion police associated independent witness, in whose presence the driver of the above vehicle disclosed his name as Ashutosh and the other occupants of the vehicle disclosed their names as Abhi Katoch (petitioner herein), Rajat and Gurupratap (co-accused). Thereafter, the police searched the vehicle and recovered a transparent envelope, which contained some brownish substance and it was heroin. On weighment, the recovered contraband was found to be 6.85 grams. Thereafter, the police completed all the codal formalities and apt recoveries were effected. A case was registered and the accused persons, including the petitioner, were arrested. Police prepared the spot map and also recorded the statements of the witnesses. As per the police, the accused persons and the petitioner are not disclosing from where they procured the recovered contraband. The recovered contraband, upon chemical examination, found to be sample of diacety morphine (heroin). Co-accused Rajat stands enlarged on bail by the learned Trial Court. One more case under Section 21 of the ND&PS Act is pending against the petitioner. Investigation is complete and the challan stands presented in the learned Trial Court. Lastly, it is prayed that the bail application of the petitioner be dismissed, as the petitioner was found involved in a serious offence. One more case under Section 21 of the ND&PS Act is pending against the petitioner. Investigation is complete and the challan stands presented in the learned Trial Court. Lastly, it is prayed that the bail application of the petitioner be dismissed, as the petitioner was found involved in a serious offence. 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 vice counsel for the petitioner, learned Additional Advocate General for the State and gone through the record, including the police report, carefully. 6. The learned vice 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 keeping the petitioner behind the bars for an unlimited period, especially when nothing remains to be recovered at his instance, investigation is complete, challan stands presented in the learned Trial Court, the custody of the petitioner is not at all required by the police, 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 one more case is pending against the petitioner under Section 21 of the ND&PS Act, so in case he is enlarged on bail, he may repeat the offence or may flee from justice or may tamper with the prosecution evidence, so the bail application of the petitioner be dismissed. 7. In rebuttal the learned vice counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner is permanent resident of the place, thus neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice, nothing is to be recovered at his instance, custody of the petitioner is not at all required by the police, as the investigation is complete and challan stands presented in the learned Trial Court soon. Moreover, the petitioner is not a drug peddler, but a drug addict and needs proper counseling to quit the drugs, so the application be allowed and the petitioner be enlarged on bail. 8. At this stage, considering the age of the petitioner, who is 25 years old, the manner in which the offence is alleged to have been committed by the petitioner, the fact that there is nothing emanates from the records that the petitioner is a drug peddler, in fact, he is drug addict and needs counseling, considering the quantity of the contraband, also the fact that the petitioner is neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice, as he is resident of the place, the custody of the petitioner is not at all required by the police, as the investigation is complete, challan stands presented in the learned Trial Court, the fact that the petitioner cannot be kept behind the bars for an unlimited period, considering the fact that co-accused Rajat has already been enlarged on bail by the learned Trial Court and also considering all the facets of the case and without discussing the same elaborately at this stage, 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. 232 of 2020, dated 10.08.2020, under Section 21 of the ND&PS Act, registered in Police Station Nurpur, District Kangra, 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. 9. (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.