Hemant Sharma vs State Of Himachal Pradesh

Vivek Singh Thakur, J

Petitioner has approached this Court, invoking provisions of Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure (in short ‘Cr.PC’), seeking regular bail in case FIR No. 27 of 2022 dated 3.2.2022, registered under Sections 21 and 29 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (in short ‘NDPS Act’) in Police Station Dharampur, District Solan H.P.

2 Status report stands filed. Record was also made available.

Prosecution case, in brief, is that on 2.2.2022 at about 6.40 PM police party, while on patrolling near Toll Plaza Sanwara, received a reliable information from a faithful informer that two young men namely Hemant Sharma (petitioner) and Umesh Thakur are selling and purchasing chitta in Bolero No. HP-64A-0518 in Jabli Bazar near Ashish Hotel and on raiding the vehicle immediately, huge quantity of heroine could be recovered. Information was firm and reliable, but, there was possibility of disappearance of contraband and evidence, therefore, a written information was prepared under Section 42(2) of NDPS Act and was sent to Supervisory Officer, SIU Solan, through C.Naveen Kumar. Thereafter, police party, after associating two independent persons Bhupinder Singh Thakur and Sandeep, moved towards Jabli Bazar and reached near Ashish Hotel at 7.20 PM, where Bolero vehicle, in reference, was found parked on side of road with two occupants therein. Police party informed them about information received through informer and asked their identity. Person sitting on driving seat was found Umesh Thakur and another person sitting along with him on co-driver seat was Hemant Sharma (petitioner). Search of Bolero was conducted by following the prescribed procedure. During search, a transparent plastic pouch, containing orange colored soft powder was found kept below the footmat of co-driver seat. Occupants of vehicle had disclosed that it was chitta/heroine and it was verified with the help of drug detection kit. On weighing with the Digital Weighing machine, it was found 6.37 grams. The recovered contraband was taken in possession and seized by following the procedure. Ruka was sent for registration of FIR. After registration of FIR, petitioner along with co-accused was arrested on 3.2.2022 at 3.45 AM. After remaining for three days in police remand, petitioner is, now, in judicial custody since then.

4 Challan has been prepared and being checked for presenting it in Court. As per status report, petitioner Hemant Sharma has been found involved in two other cases i.e. FIR No. 65 of 2016 dated 26.6.2016 under Sections 452, 323, 506 and 34 IPC and FIR No. 111 of 2018 dated 29.8.2018 under Sections 448, 506 and 34 IPC in Police Station Dharampur, trials whereof are pending in Court.

5 Learned counsel for petitioner has submitted that previous cases registered against the petitioner are not with respect to any offence committed by petitioner under NDPS Act, but, these are cases of quarrel taken place between family members on the issues related to land dispute. Further that petitioner is first time offender under NDPS Act and recovered quantity is 6.37 grams which is slightly more than small quantity and petitioner is behind the bars since last about more than 2½ months and further that keeping in view the age of petitioner and therefore, adopting a re-formative attitude, petitioner deserves to be enlarged on bail.

6 Learned Additional Advocate General has submitted that petitioner has been found involved in two more cases in the years 2016 and 2018 and now, he is involved in commission of offence of a nature, which is destroying not only the individuals but family members causing harm to the society at large and therefore, his bail application deserves to be rejected.

7 It has been contended on behalf of petitioner that vehicle does not belong to petitioner and petitioner was not having any knowledge about contraband recovered from vehicle which as per prosecution case has been found under the foot-mat of vehicle. Further that petitioner is a young boy of 27 years of age and his family is having roots in the society and there is no possibility that petitioner would flee from justice or jump over the bail. He further submits that petitioner is ready to abide by conditions imposed by Court, in case he is enlarged on bail.

8 Without commenting upon the merits of case, but, taking into consideration, the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and also taking note of the factors and parameters, as propounded by the Supreme Court and this Court, required to be considered at the time of adjudication of bail application, I am of the opinion that petitioner may be enlarged on bail in present case, at this stage.

9 Accordingly, petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail, at this stage, subject to furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court within a period of two weeks from today and also subject to any further conditions to be imposed by trial Court for assuring his presence during trial including the following further conditions:-

(i) That the petitioner shall make himself available during the investigation as well as trial on each and every date as and when required;

(iii) That the petitioner shall 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 Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. She shall not, in any manner, try to overawe or influence or intimidate the prosecution witnesses;

(iv) That the petitioner shall not obstruct the smooth progress of the investigation as well as trial;

(v) That the petitioner shall not jump over the bail and shall inform, in writing, regarding change of address, land line number and/or mobile number, if any, in advance, to concerned Police Station;

(vi) That the petitioner shall not commit the offence similar to the offence to which he is accused or suspected or the commission of which she is suspected;

(vii) In the event of repetition of commission of offence, bail granted in present case shall be liable to be cancelled on taking appropriate steps by prosecution/police;

(viii) That the petitioner shall not leave India without prior permission of Court;

(ix) That petitioner shall not misuse his liberty in any manner.

10 It will be open to the prosecution to apply for imposing any such other or further condition on the petitioner as deemed necessary in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice. It will also be open to the trial Court/Magistrate to impose any other or further condition on the petitioner as it may deem necessary in the interest of justice.

11 In case the petitioner violates any condition imposed upon him, his bail shall be liable to be cancelled. In such eventuality, prosecution may approach the competent Court of law for cancellation of bail in accordance with law.

12 Learned trial Court is directed to comply with the directions issued by the High Court, vide communication No. HHC/VIG/Misc.Instructions/93-IV.7139 dated 18.3.2013.

13 Any observation made in this order shall not affect the merits of case in any manner and will strictly confine for the disposal of this bail application filed under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure 1973.

The petitioner is permitted to produce copy of order downloaded from the High Court website and the trial Court shall not insist for certified copy of the order, however, they may verify the order from the High Court website or otherwise.

Petition stands disposed of. Dasti copy on usual terms.