Kartar Singh vs State of Haryana

Ram Chand Gupta, J.—The present petition filed u/s 438 Cr.P.C. is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No. 183, dated 29.8.2013, u/s 15 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short the ''Act''), registered at Police Station Sadar Ambala. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the whole record carefully, including the impugned order passed by learned Special Judge, Ambala, vide which application filed on behalf of the petitioner for anticipatory bail was dismissed.

Brief allegations are that there was secret information with the police that the present petitioner-accused used to indulge in the business of poppy husk and hence, on the said information, naka was laid. Two independent witnesses, namely, Sher Singh son of Ranjit Singh, Lambardar and Sahab Singh son of Labh Singh, residents of Village Noorpur also joined the police party. Petitioner-accused was seen coming from the side of Village Durana alongwith a bag on his head and, however, after seeing the police party he succeeded in running away by throwing the said bag. He was identified by police officials as well as by the two independent witnesses. On search of the bag, poppy husk weighing 9 kg 920 grams was recovered. Petitioner is a repeat offender. Admittedly, already FIR No. 63 dated 2.4.2013 u/s 15 of the Act was registered against him on account of recovery of poppy husk.

It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner-accused that police of Police Station Sadar, Ambala, was inimical towards him and hence he was falsely implicated in this case. It is also contended that he has also given an application to Director General of Police, Haryana, at Panchkula, few days after registration of the present FIR, Annexure P3. It is also contended that it was not possible for the petitioner-accused to run away in the presence of police officials.

However, petitioner is a repeat offender under the Act. He was also identified by two independent witnesses including Nambardar of the village. Hence, merely, on the ground that he succeeded in running away after seeing the police party, it cannot be said that he is entitled for extraordinary relief of anticipatory bail. Hence, in view of these facts and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present petition filed by petitioner-Kartar Singh for grant of anticipatory bail is, hereby, dismissed being devoid of any merit.