Gokul Chand vs State Of H.P

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J

The petitioner, who is in custody w.e.f. 04.11.2019 in FIR No. 105 of 2019, dated 04.11.2019, registered under Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the NDPS Act) at Police Station, Janjheli, District Mandi, H.P., has preferred the instant petition for grant of regular bail.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties through video conference and gone through the status report filed by the respondent-State.

The prosecution case against the petitioner is that cannabis was found inside the home of the petitioner, which was weighed on electronic balance and the weight of the cannabis alongwith polythene, poly-packets and thread pieces was 1.018 Kg., leading to registration of FIR No. 105 of 2019. The petitioner was arrested on 04.11.2019. The final charge sheet, under section 173(2) Cr.P.C. has been filed on 04.05.2020 before the learned District & Sessions Judge, Mandi, which is pending consideration. It has also come in the status report that as per report of State Forensic Science Laboratory (SFSL), Junga , the weight of polythene wrappers, poly-packets and thread pieces was 0.029 Kg. and the actual weight of cannabis, allegedly recovered from the petitioner was 0.989 Kg.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that instant bail petition was moved after noticing the quantity of recovered contraband reflected as less than notified commercial quantity in SFSL report appended by the respondent alongwith the charge-sheet filed on 04.05.2020. An earlier bail application was withdrawn by the petitioner on account of commercial quantity of contraband earlier reflected recovered from him. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that petitioner has been falsely implicated with the offence alleged against him. He further submitted that the house from which, the contraband was allegedly recovered was not owned by the bail petitioner, who resided in a separate house situated at another place; The recovery was allegedly effected by the police by breaking open the locks of the closed house; Petitioner is not associated in any manner with the cannabis allegedly recovered from the locked house, which does not belong to him. Learned counsel further submitted that there is no criminal history of the petitioner. Learned Additional Advocate General did not dispute the factual submission that contraband in question was recovered from a locked house. He, however, opposed the grant of bail on the ground that the petitioner was involved and associated with recovery of 0.989 gms. of cannabis.

The commercial quantity of cannabis notified under the provisions of the NDPS Act is One Kg. Since as per the status report, cannabis allegedly recovered from the accused was 0.989 Kg., which is less than notified commercial quantity, therefore, rigors of Section 37 of the Act will not be attracted. Contraband was recovered from a locked house, which according to the bail petitioner was neither owned nor occupied by him. Presently, there is no positive evidence on record to show any contrary position. Whether contraband allegedly recovered from the locked house belonged to the petitioner or not ; whether locked house belonged to the petitioner ; whether alleged recovery was effected in accordance with law are questions to be answered after appreciation of evidence to be led during the trial. Petitioner is in judicial custody for the last about seven months. Chargesheet stands already filed. No criminal antecedent of the petitioner has been pointed out in the status report. Complexity of petitioner with the offence is yet to be proved. Ex-facie it cannot be said that petitioner was owner of the house as well as of the contraband allegedly recovered from that locked house. Trial of the case will take considerable time. In the facts and circumstances of the case, petitioner cannot be allowed to remain behind bars for an indefinite period. Therefore, this petition is allowed. Accordingly, the accused-petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in aforementioned FIR, on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with one local surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned Sessions Judge/Additional Sessions Judge, District Mandi, subject to following conditions:-

i). The petitioner is directed to join and cooperate the investigation of the case as and when called for by the Investigating Officer in accordance with law;

ii). The petitioner shall not temper with the evidence or hamper the investigation in any manner whatsoever;

iii) The petitioner shall not leave India without prior permission of the Court;

iv). The petitioner shall not make any inducement, threat or promise, directly or indirectly, to the Investigating Officer or any person acquainted with the facts of the case to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or any Police Officer;

v). In case the petitioner is put to trial, then he shall attend the trial on every hearing, unless exempted in accordance with law;

vi). The petitioner shall inform the Station House Officer of the Police Station concerned about his place of residence during bail and trial. Any change in the same shall also be communicated within two weeks thereafter. Petitioner shall furnish details of his Aadhar Card, Telephone Number, E-mail, PAN Card, Bank Account Number, if any; and

vii) It is made clear that in case the petitioner is arraigned as an accused in future, in any FIR under NDPS Act, then his bail is liable to be cancelled. It is open for the Investigating Agency to move appropriate application in that regard.

It is clarified that the observations made above are only for the purpose of adjudication of the present bail petition and learned trial Court shall not be influenced by any of these observations while deciding the case on merits. It shall be open for the prosecution to move for cancellation of the bail in case of violation of any of the terms & conditions of the bail or the petitioner abuses the liberty granted and breaches any of the conditions of bail. The petition stands disposed of accordingly.

The Registry is directed to send a copy of this order to the District and Sessions Judge concerned through e-mail. The Court/Authority, attesting the personal/surety competent bonds, shall not insist upon for requiring certified copy of this order and shall download the same from the website of High Court for the purpose of office record.

Copy(s) of the aforesaid order be supplied by the Secretary to learned counsel for the parties through e-mail.