Randhir Ray vs State Of Himachal Pradesh

Ajay Mohan Goel, J

By way of this bail petition, filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the petitioner has prayed for grant of bail, in FIR No.37 of

2020, dated 10.06.2020, registered at Police Station, Swarghat, District Bilaspur, H.P., under Section 21 of the Narcotics Drugs & Psychotropic

Substances Act, 1985.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that petitioner is innocent and he is not guilty of the offence alleged against him. He further submits

that as charge sheet stands filed, no purpose is going to be solved by detaining the petitioner in custody. He further submits that in case of grant of bail,

the petitioner shall abide by all the conditions which may be imposed upon him by the Court.

Opposing the bail petition, learned Deputy Advocate General has argued that the quantity which has been recovered from the petitioner, though is

intermediate quantity, that is, 194.68 Grams of heroin, however, earlier also, cases stand registered against the petitioner under the provisions of the

Narcotics Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, and in case of grant of bail, there is each and every possibility that he may again indulge in

similar activities. She has also submitted that petitioner belongs to the State of Bihar and there is a possibility that upon grant of bail, he may abscond

and thus, evade the trial.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the status report, this Court concurs with the submissions so made by learned

Deputy Advocate General that as previously also the petitioner has been booked for committing offences under the provisions of Narcotics Drugs &

Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, therefore, there is each and every possibility, that if released on bail, he may again indulge in such like activities.

This observation has been made by the Court because while considering the case for grant of bail, one of the factors which has to be taken into

consideration by the Court is whether if released on bail, there is any possibility of the petitioner again indulging in such like activities. Besides this, the

petitioner, as rightly pointed out by learned Deputy Advocate General happens to be a resident of State of Bihar and, therefore, there is merit in the

contention of learned Deputy Advocate General that if released on bail, petitioner may abscond and thus may not be available for trial. Accordingly,

this bail petition is dismissed, at this stage.