Panna Lal vs State Of Himachal Pradesh

Satyen Vaidya, J

Petitioner is an accused of offence under Sections 20, 25 and 29 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short ‘the

Act’), in case FIR No. 5 of 2021 dated 10.1.2021, registered at Police Station, Aut, District Mandi, H.P. The petitioner is in custody since

13.2.2021.

Petitioner has approached this Court by filing petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of bail in above noted case on the grounds that he is

innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case. Petitioner has been made accused on the basis of concocted story and there is no legal evidence,

connecting him with the alleged offence. No recovery has been effected from him. Petitioner is permanent resident of Village Jestha, Post Office

Thela, Tehsil Bhunter, District Kullu, Himachal Pradesh and has roots in society. In case petitioner is released on bail, he shall not flee from the course

of justice and will not jump the bail in any eventuality. Petitioner is ready and willing to abide by any condition, as may be imposed against him. He is

not accused in any offence in the past.

In response, the respondent-State has filed status report. It is stated that on 10.1.2021, at about 7.00 A.M., the policy party had laid a Naka at

Panarsa-Dalasni Road and at about 7.10 A.M. a vehicle bearing No. PH-48D-3171 came from the side of Dalasni Bridge towards Panarsa. The

vehicle was stopped at the instance of police. The vehicle was occupied by two persons named Sandeep Kumar and Naveen Kumar. During search

of the vehicle, 2.405 k.g. charas was recovered from the engine cabin of the vehicle. The occupants of the vehicle were arrested. During

investigation, the occupants of the vehicle allegedly named petitioner to be the person from whom they had purchased the recovered contraband. As

per status report, the Investigating Officer, during investigation, procured CDRs and CAF of the Mobile Numbers belonging to said Sandeep Kumar

and petitioner. The mobile numbers alleged to be belonging to petitioner are 78763-71235 and 98059-32675. On the basis of aforesaid evidence,

petitioner was apprehended and arrested.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the record carefully.

No doubt, the contraband involved in the case is of commercial quantity, but the case of the petitioner is to be examined vis-Ã -vis the exceptions

carved out under the aforesaid provisions of law.

During hearing of the case, on repeated queries the police official present along with police file could not produce the Consumer Application Forum

(CAF) with respect to the aforesaid mobile numbers attributed to the petitioner. Even no other document could be pointed out on behalf of the

respondent to prima-facie establish that the said mobile numbers belonged to petitioner.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has stated at the Bar that challan has been presented in the Court and the petitioner has applied for a copy

thereof but copies of CAF pertaining to said mobile numbers are not available therewith also.

It is settled position of law that the statement of a co-accused under Section 67 of the NDPS Act is inadmissible in evidence. It has also been

pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner that even no such statement has been recorded in present case. In absence of such material, as

discussed above, it is hard to find out any prima-facie material against petitioner to connect him with alleged offence.

Thus, the petitioner is prima-facie not found to be involved in the commission of alleged offence. There is nothing on record to suggest that

petitioner has any past criminal history. Therefore, it cannot be presumed also that petitioner shall indulge in any criminal activity in case he is released

on bail.

The petitioner is permanent resident of Village Jestha, Post Office Thela, Tehsil Bhunter, District Kullu, Himachal Pradesh. There is no likelihood

of his absconding or fleeing from course of justice. No fruitful purpose shall be served by prolonging the custody of petitioner. The trial of the case is

likely to take considerable time before completion. There is nothing on record to suggest that in case of release of petitioner on bail, he may affect the

course of trial adversely.

In view of given facts and circumstances of the case, petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in case FIR No. 5 of

2021 dated 10.1.2021, registered at Police Station, Aut, District Mandi, H.P. on his furnishing personal bonds in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- with one

solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. This order shall be subject to following conditions:-

i) That the petitioner regularly appear before learned trial Court on each and every date of hearing.

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 from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police.

iii) That the petitioner shall not in any manner tamper with the prosecution evidence.

iv) That any indulgence of petitioner in criminal activities during the continuance of this order shall entail cancellation of the bail granted to the

petitioner.

v) That the petitioner shall not leave India till conclusion of trial without permission of the learned trial Court, if any.

vi) That in case of violation of any of the conditions, the bail granted to the bail applicant shall be liable to be cancelled.

Any observation made herein above shall not be taken as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case and the trial Court shall decide the

matter uninfluenced by any observation made herein above.