Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2025 DIGILAW 1090 (HP)

Krishan v. State of Himachal Pradesh

2025-05-22

VIRENDER SINGH

body2025
JUDGMENT : Virender Singh, J. By way of the present application, filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘BNSS’), applicant-Krishan has sought his release, on bail, during the pendency of the trial, in case FIR No.24 of 2025, dated 02.02.2025, registered under Sections 21 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘NDPS Act’) and Section 111 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘BNS’), with Police Station Palampur, District Kangra, H.P. 2. According to the applicant, he is innocent person and has falsely been implicated, in the present case. 3. It has been averred in the application that the applicant has no role to play in the commission of crime and nothing has been recovered from his possession.Investigation, in the present case, is stated to be completed. 4. It has been pleaded by the applicant in para No.12 of the bail application that he is also facing another case, under the provisions of NDPS Act, which is pending adjudication before the learned trial Court. 5. According to the applicant, he had earlier tried his luck by moving similar application, before the Court of learned Special Judge, Palampur, District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh. However, the same was dismissed vide order dated22.04.2025. 6. Apart from this, Mr. N.K. Thakur, Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. Divya Raj Singh, Advocate, appearing for the applicant, has given certain undertakings, on behalf of the applicant, for which, the applicant is ready to abide by, in case, ordered to be released on bail, during the pendency of the trial. 7. On the basis of the above facts, a prayer has been made to allow the bail application. 8. When, put to notice, the police has filed the status report, disclosing therein, that on 01.02.2025, HC Vijay Kumar No.18, I/O PS Palampur, along with other police officials, was on patrolling duty, as well as, the duty to detect the crime, relating to excise and narcotics. 8.1. It is the further case of the police that at about 11:45 pm, while on patrolling duty, police party reached at a place, namely Sugger, near Hanuman Temple, then, IO noticed a white coloured Swift car, parked on the side of the road, upon which, IO directed his driver to stop the vehicle on the left side of the road. It is the further case of the police that at about 11:45 pm, while on patrolling duty, police party reached at a place, namely Sugger, near Hanuman Temple, then, IO noticed a white coloured Swift car, parked on the side of the road, upon which, IO directed his driver to stop the vehicle on the left side of the road. Thereafer, IO, along with other police officials, proceeded towards the said car. Registration number of the said car was found to be HR41-F-1766, in which, two persons were found sitting. 8.2. It is the further case of the police that when, IO enquired from those two persons, they got perplexed. However, on enquiry, the person, sitting on wheel, disclosed his name as Sandeep Singh, S/o Kulwant Singh, R/o Flt No.12, Escort Avenue Verka, Amritsar, Punjab and the other person, who was sitting next to the aforesaid person, disclosed his name as Ravinder Singh, S/o Manjit Singh, R/o Block Verka, Abbabi Bagge Wali, Verka, Amritsar, Punjab. Subsequently, IO demanded the requisite documents and on perusal of the same, registration number of the said vehicle was found to be in the name of Mohan Singh, S/o Hawela Singh, R/o VPO Pehri Guilam Ali, Kaithal, Haryana. 8.3. Thereafter, on noticing the suspicious behaviour of both the persons and the increasing incidents of theft in the area, IO deemed it appropriate to search the said vehicle. As such, he associated Local Councillor Anish Nag in the investigation and thereafter, the vehicle was searched.During the search of the vehicle, underneath the steering wheel, a green coloured envelope was found tied, which, on opening, was found to be containing some substance. On checking on the drug detection kit, the same was found to be chitta/heroin, which, on weighing, was found to be 135 gms. The said contraband was taken into possession. Other codal formalities were completed. 8.4. After registration of the FIR, the police has arrested both the accused persons. 8.5. During the investigation, on the basis of the alleged revelations, made by accused Sandeep Singh, involvement of Krishan @Vikka, S/o Ram Chand (applicant) has been found, as, according to him, on 01.02.2025, he has purchased the chitta, weighing 135 gms, from Krishan @Vikka (applicant), in a sum of Rs.50,000/-, which he allegedly paid in cash. 8.6. 8.5. During the investigation, on the basis of the alleged revelations, made by accused Sandeep Singh, involvement of Krishan @Vikka, S/o Ram Chand (applicant) has been found, as, according to him, on 01.02.2025, he has purchased the chitta, weighing 135 gms, from Krishan @Vikka (applicant), in a sum of Rs.50,000/-, which he allegedly paid in cash. 8.6. Thereafter, the search of the house of applicant- Krishan was conducted and during the search, a sum of Rs.30,000/-, in cash, was found. Consequently, the applicant was arrested on 05.02.2025 at about 08:30 pm. 8.7. As per the status report, apart from the above three accused persons, involvement of Sagar Sharma and Jyoti was also found, in this case and they were also associated in the investigation and were arrested. 8.8. As per the status report, apart from the present case, another case, bearing FIR No.91/20 dated 24.04.2020, under Section 21 of NDPS Act, has been found to have been registered against the applicant with Police Station Chheharta, Amritsar. 8.9. Investigation, in the present case, is stated to be completed, as, after receiving the positive report from the SFSL, Junga, police has prepared the challan and submitted in the Court of learned Special Judge, Palampur, District Kangra, H.P. 9. On the basis of the previous criminal history of the applicant, a prayer has been made to dismiss the application. 10. Heard. 11. In this case, the contraband, allegedly stated to have been recovered from accused Sandeep Singh and Ravinder Singh, is 135 grams of heroin/chitta. Admittedly, the said contraband does not fall, within the definition of ‘commercial quantity’. As such, the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act are not applicable, in this case. 12. Once, it has been held that the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act are not applicable, in that eventuality, the presumption of innocence is still available to the applicant, as the bail application cannot be rejected merely as a matter of punishment, since, pre-trial punishment is prohibited under the law, as the punishment can be inflicted, after the conclusion of trial. 13. Merely on the basis of the revelations, made by accused Sandeep Singh, with regard to the alleged purchase of chitta/heroin from the applicant by paying a sum of Rs.50,000/, it cannot be taken to be disadvantageous for the applicant. 14. 13. Merely on the basis of the revelations, made by accused Sandeep Singh, with regard to the alleged purchase of chitta/heroin from the applicant by paying a sum of Rs.50,000/, it cannot be taken to be disadvantageous for the applicant. 14. Now, the next question, which arises for determination, before this Court, is whether the relief, as sought in the application, can be declined to the applicant, on the basis of the earlier case, registered on 24.04.2020, that too, under the provisions of NDPS Act. Admittedly, in the said case, the applicant has not been convicted by the competent Court of law, nor, anything is on record, which would show that he has been declared as habitual offender, in this case. 15. In the present case, investigation is complete and the police has submitted the challan, in the competent Court of law. This fact is sufficient to demonstrate that the custodial interrogation of the applicant is no longer required by the police. 16. Moreover, the chances of commencement and conclusion of trial against the applicant, in near future, are not so bright. As such, he cannot be kept in judicial custody, that too, for the indefinite period. 15. So far as the apprehensions of the learned Additional Advocate General that the applicant is the resident of District Amritsar, Punjab and may not be available for the trial, in case, ordered to be released on bail, are concerned, for those apprehensions, reasonable conditions can be imposed upon the applicant, in case, he is ordered to be released on bail. 16. Considering all these facts, this Court is of the view that the applicant is able to make out a case for his release, on bail, during the pendency of the trial. Hence, the present bail application is liable to be allowed and is accordingly allowed. 17. Consequently, the applicant is ordered to be released, on bail, in case FIR No.24 of 2025, dated 02.02.2025, registered under Sections 21 and 29 of the NDPS Act and Section 111 of the BNS, with Police Station Palampur, District Kangra, H.P., on his furnishing personal bonds in the sum of Rs.50,000/-, with two sureties of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the learned ACJM, Palampur, District Kangra. 18. 18. This order, however, shall be subject to the following conditions:- a) The applicant shall regularly attend the trial Court on each and every date of hearing and if prevented by any reason to do so, seek exemption from appearance by filing the appropriate application; b) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence nor hamper the investigation of the case in any manner whatsoever; c) The applicant shall not make any inducement, threat or promises to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or the Police Officer, and d) The applicant shall not leave the territory of India without the prior permission of the Court. 19. Any of the observations, made hereinabove, shall not be taken, as an expression of opinion, on the merits of the case, as these observations are confined, only to the disposal of the present bail application. 20. It is made clear that respondent-State is at liberty to move an appropriate application, in case, any of the bail conditions is found violated by the applicant. 21. The Registry is directed to forward a soft copy of the bail order to the Superintendent of Jail, Lala Lajpat Rai, District and Open Air Correctional Home, Dharamshala, District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh, through e-mail, with a direction to enter the date of grant of bail in the e-prison software. 22. In case, the applicant is not released within a period of seven days from the date of grant of bail, the Superintendent of Jail, Lala Lajpat Rai, District and Open Air Correctional Home, Dharamshala, District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh, is directed to inform this fact to the Secretary, DLSA, Kangra. The Superintendent of Jail, Lala Lajpat Rai, District and Open Air Correctional Home, Dharamshala, District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh, is further directed that if the applicant fails to furnish the bail bonds, as per the order passed by this Court, within a period of one month from today, then, the said fact be submitted to this Court.