Hukam Ram vs State Of Himachal Pradesh

Vivek Singh Thakur, J

Petitioner has approached this Court seeking bail in case FIR No. 190 of 2020, dated 6.9.2020, registered in Police Station Joginder Nagar, District Mandi, H.P. under Section 20 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (for short “NDPS Act”).

Status report stands filed. Record was also made available.

Prosecution case, as per status report, is that on 6.9.2020, Police Party, at about 6:15 P.M., was present in Kandhar area near Ghatasni in District Mandi in connection with patrolling. They noticed a person coming on foot from Jhatingri side to Ghatasni side with a rucksack bag on his back, who on seeing Police party turned back and started running, which raised suspicion of carrying some illegal or intoxicating substance and, therefore, he was chased and overpowered. Two persons crossing the spot in their Car were stopped and associated in search and seizure and thereafter bag of that person (petitioner) was checked, wherefrom 1.015 KG, charas was recovered. Recovered contraband was taken into possession and seized by complying procedure and thereafter Rukka was sent to Police Station.

On the basis of Rukka sent to the Police Station, FIR was registered and petitioner was arrested on 6.9.2020 and investigation was carried on. After remaining in Police custody petitioner is now in judicial custody. It has been further stated in the status report that during last two years, out of 16 witnesses, only 7 witnesses have been examined and next date for recording evidence has been fixed as 12.10.2022.

Learned Additional Advocate General has opposed grant of bail on the ground that commercial quantity of 1 kg and 015 grams of charas has been recovered from the petitioner and the offence committed by the petitioner is not only affecting the individual but also society at large, therefore, petitioner is not entitled for bail.

It has been submitted on behalf of petitioner that even if prosecution story is considered to be true, then also quantity of contraband is slightly higher than the commercial quantity, which is nearer to the intermediate quantity and, therefore, it is a case of border line, where rigors of Section 37 of NDPS Act are not to be applied and further petitioner has no criminal history of commission of the same and similar nature of offence and, therefore, at this stage, it would be injustice with the petitioner to consider him a habitual offender. It has been submitted that the petitioner is behind the bars since 6.9.2020, i.e. for about last two years and, therefore, keeping in view the quantity of contraband alleged to have been recovered from him, he is entitled for bail.

Considering all facts and circumstances, as narrated in the prosecution  story,  including  quantum  of  contraband  recovered  from  the polythene bag allegedly being carried by petitioner and period of his detention and other material placed before me, I am of the opinion that, at this stage, without  commenting  upon  merits  of  the  claims  and  counter  claims  of prosecution and learned counsel for the petitioner-accused, petitioner can be enlarged on bail.

Accordingly, petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail on furnishing personal bond in the sum of  Rs. 1,00,000/- with one surety in the like amount, to the satisfaction of trial Court within two weeks from today and upon such further conditions as may be deemed fit and proper by the trial Court, including the  conditions enumerated hereinafter, so  as to ensure presence of the petitioner at the time of trial:-

(i) That the petitioner shall join the investigation and attend the Court as and when directed to do so by the Investigating Agency/Court;

(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 him/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/trial;

(iv) that the petitioner shall not commit the offence similar to the offence to which he is accused or suspected;

(v) that the petitioner shall not misuse his liberty in any manner;

(vi) that the petitioner shall not jump over the bail;

(vii) that he shall keep on informing about the change in address, landline number and/or mobile number, if any, for their availability to Police and/or during trial;

(viii) he shall not leave India without permission of the Court.

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

In case the petitioner violates any conditions 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.

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 18.03.2013.

Observations made in this petition hereinbefore shall not affect the merits of the case in any manner and are strictly confined for the disposal of the bail application.

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

The petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms.