Sanjeev Kumar vs State Of Himachal Pradesh

Ajay Mohan Goel, J

By way of these petitions, a prayer has been made for release of the petitioners on bail, in case F.I.R. No.8/2020, dated 16.01.2020, registered against him at Police Station Damtal, District Kangra, H.P., under Sections 21, 22, 25 and 29 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (hereinafter referred to 'NDPS' for short) Act.

Both these petitions were initially listed on 06.03.2020, when an order was passed by Hon'ble Coordinate Bench of this Court for listing the cases on 23.03.2020, with direction to the State to file status report. On the said date i.e. 23.03.2020, on the request of learned counsel appearing vice original counsel for the petitioners, the matter was ordered to be listed on 06.04.2020. Thereafter, the matter could not be taken on account of lockdown due to COVID­19 Pandemic.

The cases were subsequently listed in the Court on 08.05.2020, on a request which was so made by learned counsel for the petitioners for listing of the bail petitions. On the said date, i.e. on 08.05.2020, when the matter was taken up for consideration by the Court, Mr. Suresh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners fairly stated before the Court that as per his information, the petitioners during the pendency of these bail petitions had independently filed fresh bail petitions before the learned Trial Court without disclosing therein the factum of the pendency of the present bail petitions pending before this Court.

In this background, the Court instructed the parties to obtain information as to who were the lawyers, who filed said bail applications before the learned Trial Court by concealing the factum of these two bail petitions pending before this Court.

Learned Additional Advocate General informed the Court, as stands recorded in the order which was passed by this Court on 26.05.2020, that the bail petitions stood filed before the learned Trial Court by the petitioners through Mr. Pankaj Tyagi, Advocate, but said counsel stated that he was not imparted instructions to the effect that bail petitions in the same F.I.R. were pending in this Court i.e. in the High Court of Himachal Pradesh. Learned Additional Advocate General stated that he may be granted some time as on whose instructions said bail petitions were filed before the learned Trial Court.

Today, learned Additional Advocate General submits that as per his instructions, the bail petitions were filed before the learned Court below, on the instructions of the brother of the accused, which fact has not been denied by learned counsel for the petitioners.

This Court expresses its displeasure over the conduct of the petitioners of filing fresh bail applications during the pendency of the present bail petitions before the learned Trial Court without disclosing before the learned Trial Court the factum of the pendency of these petitions. In fact, in my considered view, said act of the petitioners is abuse of the judicial process as least that the Court expects from a litigant is that the litigant should approach the Court with clean hands.

Be that as it may, the fact that the petitioners are behind the bars and these petitions have been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail, the Court refrains itself from taking any action against the petitioners except warn them not to indulge in such like activities in future.

Now, coming to the facts of this case, the allegations against the petitioners are that on 16.01.2020, whereas 6.85 grams Heroin (Chitta) was recovered from the conscious and exclusive possession of petitioner Sanjeev Kumar. The weight of the white i.e. Tramadol weighing 72.81 grams, was recovered from the conscious possession of Yuv Raj.

Learned counsel for the petitioners has argued that the petitioners are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in the case by the police. He submits that the petitioners are young boys and as they are behind the bars for a considerable period of time, therefore, they may be ordered to be released on bail as no fruitful purpose is going to be solved by retaining them behind the bars.

Learned Additional Advocate General, while opposing the bail petitions, has argued that taking into consideration the gravity of the offence alleged against the petitioners and further the fact that there are numerous F.I.Rs earlier also filed against them, which also includes F.I.R. registered under the ND & PS Act itself against one of the petitioners, these petitions deserve dismissal because there is each and every possibility that in the event of grant of bail, the petitioners will not only try to throttle the course of trial by influencing the witnesses as they happen to be the local residents, they may indulge in similar activities in future also. Learned Additional Advocate General further submits that as the Charge Sheet stands filed and the same is yet to be considered by the learned Trial Court, therefore also the petitions deserve dismissal.

At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that he may be permitted to withdraw these petitions, with liberty to the petitioners to approach the Court at a later stage, if so advised. These petitions are permitted to be withdrawn, with liberty, as prayed for.