Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 475 (HP)

Uttam Chand, S/o. Bali Ram v. State of H. P.

2022-08-24

CHANDER BHUSAN BAROWALIA

body2022
ORDER : The present bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been maintained by the petitioner for grant of bail in case FIR No. 224/2022, dated 07.07.2022, under Sections 21 and 296185 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, registered at Police Station Una, District Una, 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 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 06.07.2022, police party was on patrolling duty. Around 09:05 P.M., a motorcycle bearing registration No. HP21A4783 came from Santoshgarh side to Una side, which was signaled to stop. The rider of the motorcycle instead of stopping, turned his motorcycle and tried to fled from the spot. The police however managed to stop him and on seeing the police, rider of the motorcycle threw a packet from his pocket. On inquiry, the rider of the motorcycle disclosed his name as Virender Kumar and pillion rider disclosed his name as Uttam Chand (petitioner herein). On suspicion, the police associated one Deepak Kumar as an independent witness, in whose presence, the packet thrown by the rider was checked. When police opened the packet, it was containing chitta (heroin). On weighment, the recovered contraband was found to be 6.68 grams. Thereafter, the police completed all the codal formalities and registered a case under the relevant Sections of NDPS Act and the petitioner and co-accused were arrested. During interrogation, the accused persons disclosed that they are drug addicts and have purchased the Chitta at Santoshgarh for their personal use, however, they feigned ignorance about the person from whom they purchased the same. Lastly, it is prayed that the bail application of the petitioner be dismissed, as the petitioner was 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. Lastly, it is prayed that the bail application of the petitioner be dismissed, as the petitioner was 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. Ms. Ritu Singh, learned Counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner is innocent and he has nothing to do with the commission of alleged offence and nothing was recovered from the petitioner. She has further argued that the petitioner is 35 years of age and has liability of old aged parents, small child and wife, who are dependent upon him. She has argued that the petitioner is neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice and as nothing remains to be recovered from him, he may be released on bail. 6. 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. 7. At this stage, considering the age of the petitioner, his family circumstances, the recovered quantity of the contraband, i.e., 6.68 grams, the manner in which the offence is alleged to have occurred, the fact that the petitioner is neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice, the fact that the petitioner might have kept the contraband for self consumption and if it is so, he needs proper medical treatment and counseling for quitting drugs. So 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, 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. 224/2022, dated 07.07.2022, under Sections 21 and 296185 of NDPS Act, registered at Police Station Una, District Una, 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.