Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2025 DIGILAW 502 (HP)

Sanju @Sanjay Kumar v. State of Himachal Pradesh

2025-03-26

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-Sanju @Sanjay Kumar has sought his release, on bail, during the pendency of the trial, in case FIR No.33 of 2024, dated 18.08.2024, registered under Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘NDPS Act’), with Police Station Khairi, District Chamba, H.P. 2. According to the applicant, he has falsely been implicated, in this case, and has nothing to do with the alleged offence, for which, he has been arrested by the police. 3. As per applicant, investigation, in the present case, is complete and there is no iota of evidence, connecting him with the alleged crime, for which, he has been arrested. 4. According to the applicant, he had earlier tried his luck by moving similar application, before the Court of learned Special Judge, Chamba, Division Chamba, Himachal Pradesh (hereinafter referred to as the ‘trial Court’). However, the same was dismissed vide order dated 06.09.2024. 5. Apart from this, learned counsel 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. 6. On the basis of the above facts, a prayer has been made to allow the application. 7. When, put to notice, police has filed the status report, disclosing therein, that on 18.08.2024, HC Yog Raj, I/o has submitted a ruqqa to Police Station Khairi, mentioning therein that he, along with other police officials, had left the office in vehicle No.HP47-A-0323, make Mahindra Scorpio, for picketing duty and duty to collect information, regarding the offences, under the Excise and NDPS Act. 8. It is the case of the police that at about 07:05 pm, police party was present at Darlaka Rain Shelter, near Link Road Darlaka, Village Sundla Khairi. At that time, the vehicles, passing through there, were being checked. At about 07:30 pm, one motorcyclist came there from Taleru side, which was stopped for checking. The registration number of the said motorcycle was found to be HP-73- 3927. On enquiry, the said motorcyclist disclosed his name as Shauqat Ali, S/o Hanif Mohammad. 9. At that time, the vehicles, passing through there, were being checked. At about 07:30 pm, one motorcyclist came there from Taleru side, which was stopped for checking. The registration number of the said motorcycle was found to be HP-73- 3927. On enquiry, the said motorcyclist disclosed his name as Shauqat Ali, S/o Hanif Mohammad. 9. It is the further case of the police that when, HC Yog Raj was checking the documents of the said motorcycle, he noticed a person, coming on foot from Darlaka Link Road. He was having a carry bag in his right hand, who, on seeing the police party, got perplexed and turned back, upon which, Investigating Officer developed a suspicion that he might be having some suspicious articles with him. As such, with the help of the police officials, the said person was nabbed. On enquiry, he disclosed his name as Sanjay Kumar (applicant). Thereafter, the bag, which he was carrying, was searched and on opening the same, 506 gms of charas/cannabis was found to be recovered. Other codal formalities were completed. 10. Subsequently, FIR, in issue, has been registered and the accused (applicant) was arrested. 11. The contraband, so recovered, was sent to SFSL Junga, for chemical analysis, after complying with the provisions of Section 52A of the NDPS Act and positive report has been received. 12. After completion of the investigation, police has submitted the chargesheet before the competent Court of law, upon which, the competent Court of law has taken the cognizance. 13. As per the status report, charges have been framed against the applicant and three prosecution witnesses have already been examined. The case is now stated to be listed for 01.04.2025. 14. As per the status report, following cases are stated to have been registered, against the applicant:- “(i) FIR No.08/10 dated 14.01.2010 u/s 20 and 29 of NDPS Act, PS Tissa, District Chamba, H.P., in which, the applicant is stated to have been acquitted. 16.200 gms of charas was recovered in this case. (ii) FIR No.132/17 dated 21.11.2017 u/s 20 and 29 of NDPS Act, PS Chuwadi, District Chamba, H.P. 3.180 gms of charas was recovered in this case and the case is stated to be pending in the Court. 16.200 gms of charas was recovered in this case. (ii) FIR No.132/17 dated 21.11.2017 u/s 20 and 29 of NDPS Act, PS Chuwadi, District Chamba, H.P. 3.180 gms of charas was recovered in this case and the case is stated to be pending in the Court. (iii) FIR No.104/19 dated 09.08.2019 u/s 20, 25, 29 of NDPS Act, PS Tissa, District Chamba, H.P., which is stated to be pending, before the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Chamba and listed on 30.05.2025 for prosecution evidence. In the said case, 820 gms of charas was recovered. (iv) FIR No.20/20 dated 26.06.2020 u/s 20 of NDPS Act, PS Khairi, District Chamba, H.P., which is stated to be pending, before the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Chamba and listed on 21/22.05.2025 for prosecution evidence. In the said case, 402 gms of charas was recovered.” 15. In the case at Sr. No.1, as per status report, applicant has been acquitted, whereas, other three cases are already pending adjudication in the Court. 16. Lastly, it has been apprehended that in case, the applicant is released on bail, he may again indulge in the same activities. 17. On the basis of the above facts, a prayer has been made to dismiss the bail application. 18. The applicant has approached the Court for his release on bail, during the pendency of the trial. When, a person approaches the Court seeking the relief, it is expected from the person to disclose all the material facts, including the details of the cases, which have already been registered against him. Mentioning the details of the previous cases, also gives an opportunity to this Court to consider the case of the applicant for bail. 19. In the present case, the applicant has concealed the material facts, regarding the previous four cases, which have been registered against him, out of which, admittedly, in one of the cases, details of which have been mentioned in the preceding para, he has been acquitted. 20. In the case, mentioned at Sr. No.2, the contraband is stated to be 3.180 gms, whereas, in cases, mentioned at Sr. No.3 and 4, the contraband is stated to be 820 gms and 402 gms, respectively. 21. 20. In the case, mentioned at Sr. No.2, the contraband is stated to be 3.180 gms, whereas, in cases, mentioned at Sr. No.3 and 4, the contraband is stated to be 820 gms and 402 gms, respectively. 21. Admittedly, the applicant has not been convicted in those cases, but, considering the fact that the material fact, regarding the registration of the other cases, that too, under the provisions of Sections 20 and 29 of the NDPS Act, is a fact, which supports the apprehensions of the police that in case, he is ordered to be released on bail, he may again indulge in the same activities. 22. At the time of deciding the question of granting the relief to the applicant, in such type of cases, a delicate balance has to be maintained, between the larger interest of the society and the individual liberty. 23. While deciding the question of bail, the said facts cannot be ignored, that too, the facts, which have not been disclosed by the applicant, but, mentioned by the police in the status report. 24. Merely, the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act are not applicable, in the present case, does not mean that the applicant is entitled for the relief, as claimed in the present case. 25. In view of the discussions, made hereinabove, this Court is of the view that the applicant is not able to make out a case for his release on bail. 26. Consequently, the present bail application is dismissed. 27. 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.