Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2025 DIGILAW 340 (HP)

Rahul Thakur v. State of H. P.

2025-03-11

VIRENDER SINGH

body2025
JUDGMENT : (Virender Singh, J.) The applicant has filed the present application, under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the B.N.S.S.’) in case FIR No. 116 of 2024, dated 6.7.2024, under Sections 21 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act (hereinafter referred to as ‘the NDPS Act”) registered with Police Station Sadar Solan, District Solan, H.P. 2. According to the applicant, he has been falsely implicated in the present case, as he is an innocent person and has nothing to do with the case. 3. Applicant has further pleaded that he is in judicial custody w.e.f. 6.7.2024. As such, it cannot be inferred that his custody is any longer required by the Police. 4. The applicant has averred that he permanent resident of District Mandi, H.P. 5. The applicant had earlier tried his luck, by moving bail application No. 103-S/22 of 2024, before the learned Special Judge-II, Solan, District Solan, H.P. which was dismissed, on 6.8.2024. 6. Thereafter, he has moved another bail application bearing No. 91-S/22 of 2024, before the Court of learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Fast Track Special Court (POCSO), Solan, H.P., which was dismissed on 10.10.2024. 7. The applicant has also given details of two cases, which have already been registered against him, apart from the present matter, as under: i) FIR No. 19 of 2020, dated 20.2.2020, under Section 21 of the NDPS Act; ii) 18 of 2024, dated 15.3.2024, under sections 21 and 29 of the NDPS Act. 8. The applicant has given certain undertakings, for which, he is ready to abide by, in case, ordered to be released on bail. 9. On all these submissions, Mr. Anirudh Sharma, learned counsel appearing for the applicant, has prayed that the bail application may kindly be allowed. 10. When, put to notice, Police has filed the status report, disclosing therein that on 6.7.2024, HC Virender Kumar No. 13 submitted a ruqua, disclosing therein, that he alongwith other police officials, was on patrolling duty and was present near Police Line Gate No. 1 on four-lane road. 10. When, put to notice, Police has filed the status report, disclosing therein that on 6.7.2024, HC Virender Kumar No. 13 submitted a ruqua, disclosing therein, that he alongwith other police officials, was on patrolling duty and was present near Police Line Gate No. 1 on four-lane road. At about 12:50 a.m in the midnight, he received a secret information regarding the fact that vehicle No. HP 03C-6616 (Honda Amaze) has been parked near Income Tax Office, in which, one person, namely, Rahul Thakur, is sitting, who is doing business of selling/supplying chitta/heroin, and in case, said vehicle is checked, large quantity of contraband could be recovered. 10.1 On the basis of said information, the I.O. complied with the provisions of Section 42 (2) of the NDPS Act. Thereafter, he associated two police officials in the investigation of the case and reached at the spot. When, they reached at the spot, they noticed that on the lower side of the road, the said car was parked. When, the Police disclosed their identity, the person, sitting in the car got perplexed. 10.2 On inquiry, the person, sitting in the car has disclosed his name as Rahul Thakur (applicant). Thereafter, the vehicle was searched. On searching the vehicle, in the cup holder, a transparent plastic pouch was found, which was found containing a light yellow coloured substance, which was found to be chitta/heroin. On weighment, the same was found to be 10.16 grams. 10.3 Other codal formalities were completed. The accused was arrested. The report was sent to SFSL, Junga, from where, a positive report has been received. 10.4 Criminal history of the applicant has also been reiterated, in the status report. 10.5 Investigation, in the present case, is stated to be complete, as, Challan is stated to have been filed and the same is stated to be pending adjudication in the Court of learned Special Judge-II, Solan, H.P., wherein Charges are stated to have been framed and the case is now stated to be fixed for PWs, on 2.4.2025. 10.6 Lastly, it has been submitted that the applicant is very clever person, and in case, he is ordered to be released on bail, he may again indulge in the same activities. 11. On the basis of above facts, a prayer has been made to dismiss the application. 12. Heard. 13. 10.6 Lastly, it has been submitted that the applicant is very clever person, and in case, he is ordered to be released on bail, he may again indulge in the same activities. 11. On the basis of above facts, a prayer has been made to dismiss the application. 12. Heard. 13. Apart from the present case, involving the contraband, which does not fall within the definition of ‘commercial quantity’, two other cases have also been registered against the applicant. However, in none of the cases, the applicant has been convicted by the Competent Court of law. As such, mere registration of these two cases is not sufficient to conclude, at this stage, that the applicant falls within the definition of ‘habitual offender’. 14. Contraband, allegedly recovered, in the present case, does not fall within the definition of ‘commercial quantity’. As such, rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act are not applicable to the facts of the present case. 15. The applicant is permanent resident of District Mandi. As such, it cannot be apprehended that in case, he is ordered to be released on bail, he may not be available for trial. 16. Moreover, chances of conclusion of trial, against the applicant, in near future, are not so bright. As such, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the applicant in judicial custody, that too, for indefinite period. 12. The bail application cannot be rejected, as a matter of punishment, as punishment can only be inflicted after full fledged trial. 13. Considering all these facts, this Court is of the view that the bail application is liable to be allowed and is accordingly allowed. 14. Consequently, the applicant is ordered to be released on bail in case FIR No. 116 of 2024, dated 6.7.2024, registered under Section 21 of the NDPS Act, with Police Station, Sadar Solan, District Solan, on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/-, with one surety in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. 15. 50,000/-, with one surety in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. 15. This order, however, shall be subject to the following conditions:- a) Applicant shall make herself available for the purpose of interrogation, if so required and 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) Applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence nor hamper the investigation of the case in any manner whatsoever; c) 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) Applicant shall not leave the territory of India without the prior permission of the Court. 16. Any of the observations, made herein above, 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. 17. It is made clear that the respondent-State is at liberty to move an appropriate application, in case, any of the bail conditions is found violated by the applicant. 18. The Registry is directed to forward a soft copy of the bail order to the Superintendent of District Jail, Solan, H.P., through e-mail, with a direction to enter the date of grant of bail in the e-prison software. 19. In case, the applicant is not released within a period of seven days from the date of grant of bail, the Superintendent of District Jail, Solan, H.P. is directed to inform this fact to the Secretary, DLSA, Solan. The Superintendent of the District Jail, Solan, H.P. 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.