AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
53 paragraphs · 995 wordsVivek Singh Thakur, J
Petitioner has approached this Court seeking regular bail in case FIR No. 57 of 2021, dated 17.04.2021, registered in Police Station Sadar, District
Solan under Sections 20 and 29 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (in short ‘NDPS Act’)
2 Perusal of status report, filed on behalf of respondent/State, reveals that petitioner has been arrested on 17th April, 2021 alongwith main accused
Parveen Kumar as, according to prosecution story, two young persons i.e. main accused Parveen Kumar and petitioner Hitender Kumar, were
noticed by police standing on the road without mask and, therefore, police party had stopped the vehicle in front of them, whereupon, both of them had
become perplexed. On inquiry, they had disclosed their identification. Parveen Kumar was carrying a bag on his back, but, fear was clearly visible
from his face expression, therefore, suspicion had arisen to the police party that he would have been carrying some objectionable material and,
therefore, by following the process of search, his bag was searched, out of which 370 grams charas was recovered and after taking into possession
and seizing the same in accordance with law, Parveen Kumar was arrested under Section 20 of NDPS Act, whereas, petitioner Hitender was
arrested under Section 29 of NDPS Act for accompanying the main accused.
3 Learned Assistant Advocate General has contended that petitioner has been found in possession of such quantity which was definitely meant for
supplying and selling further and, therefore, petitioner, who was accompanying the main accused, is not entitled for bail and further that during
investigation, both of them had disclosed that they had collectively obtained the charas from a person of Nepal origin and, therefore, petitioner is also
equally responsible for commission of offence.
4 Learned counsel for petitioner has submitted that it is evident from the prosecution story that at the time of alleged recovery of charas, petitioner
was only found standing with the main accused and further that it has been specifically stated in status report that it was Parveen Kumar who was
perplexed and under fear, and further that charas was recovered from bag of Parveen Kumar and petitioner was apprehended only for accompanying
him and, thereafter, any statement made by petitioner or co-accused cannot be made basis to rope the petitioner along with main accused particularly
when such statement of accused, made during the custody, is not admissible against co-accused.
5 Rival contentions of parties with respect to veracity as well as admissibility of evidence are to be assessed by trial Court during evaluation of
evidence to be placed before it in accordance with law. Considering principles and factors relevant to be considered at the time of deciding bail
application with reference to material placed before me, but, without commenting on merits thereon, including the period of detention coupled with
circumstances stated in status report, in which petitioner has been apprehended, I find that, at this stage, petitioner may be enlarged on bail.
Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail, subject to his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with one surety in the like
amount to the satisfaction of Special Judge/trial Court, within two weeks from today, upon such further conditions as may be deemed fit and proper by
the trial Court, including conditions enumerated hereinafter, so as to ensure the presence of petitioner/accused at the time of trial and also subject to
the following 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;
(ii) 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 her from disclosing such facts to Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. He shall not, in any manner, try to overawe or
influence or intimidate the prosecution witnesses;
(iii) That the petitioner shall not obstruct the smooth progress of the investigation as well as trial;
(iv) 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;
(v) That the petitioner shall not commit the offence similar to the offence to which he is accused or suspected or the commission of which he is
suspected;
(vi) 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;
(vii) That the petitioner shall not leave India without prior permission of Court;
(viii) That petitioner shall not misuse his liberty in any manner.
6 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.
7 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.
8 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.
9 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.
10 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.
