Sunil Kumar vs State Of Himachal Pradesh

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J

Instant bail petition filed by the petitioner under Section 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure is in relation to FIR No. 94/2021, registered on 14.9.2021, under Sections 20 and 29 of NDPS Act, at Police Station, Banjar, District Kullu.

The prosecution case is that on 14.9.2021, a police patrol party present near 'Chet Modh' had stopped a vehicle bearing No. HP-16AA-1040 for routine checking. The vehicle was driven by one Ramit Kumar. Another person named Karan Singh was occupying the adjoining front seat. Back seat of the car was occupied by one Suraj Singh. During search of the car, carried out in accordance with law, 446 grams of cannabis was recovered from a bag held by Suraj Singh. The recovery of contraband led to the registration of the FIR. All the three accused namely Suraj Singh, Karan Singh and Ramit Kumar were arrested on 14.9.2021. During investigation, the accused statedly disclosed that they are drug addicts. That they had purchased the recovered cannabis from Sunil Kumar (present bail petitioner) who was friend of accused Karan Singh. The three accused also disclosed that the cannabis was purchased from the bail petitioner on 14.9.2021 against cash payment of Rs. 30,000/- to him.

The investigating agency obtained the CDR of the mobile numbers belonging to all the four accused including the bail petitioner. The CDR disclosed that all the accused were in constant touch with each other on phone w.e.f. 10.9.2021 onwards. Number of calls were exchanged between accused Karan Singh and the bail petitioner on 13th and 14th September, 2021.

Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner preferred instant petition, wherein vide order dated 8.10.2021 ad-interim protection was granted to him subject to terms and conditions.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the FIR. He has no role to play in the offences alleged in the FIR. She has further submitted that main accused Karan Singh and Ramit Kumar have already been enlarged on regular bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 4.10.2021 passed in Cr.MP(M) Nos. 1852 and 1853 of 2021. Learned Counsel further submitted that the third co-accused Suraj Singh had withdrawn his bail petition. Learned counsel prayed for confirming the order dated 8.10.2021. She further stated that petitioner will abide by all the terms and conditions in case ad-interim protection granted vide order dated 8.10.2021 is confirmed.

Per contra, learned Assistant Advocate General stated that the petitioner is accused of supplying 446 grams of cannabis to the other three accused in the FIR. He has further stated that in case the Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, then the same be made subject to stringent conditions.

The petitioner is accused of supplying intermediate quantity of contraband to the other three accused in the FIR. Therefore, provisions of Section 37 of NDPS Act are not attracted in the case. It is also admitted position that main accused Karan Singh and Ramit Kumar have already been enlarged on bail vide order dated 4.10.2021. It is also mentioned in the status report that pursuant to the ad-interim order passed in favour of the petitioner, he has joined investigation and has been co-operating with the investigating agency. The mobile phone used by the petitioner has also been taken in possession by the investigating agency. As per status report, the petitioner is a first time offender. There is no allegation in the status report that the petitioner has tried to influence the investigation while on ad-interim bail. The petitioner is resident of village Grauru, P.O. Rissa, Tehsil Sarkaghat, District Mandi, therefore, his presence can be ensured in the trial. Considering these aspects, the interim order dated 8.10.2021 is made absolute subject to the following conditions:

(i) Petitioner is directed to join the investigation of the case as and when called for by the Investigating Officer in accordance with law. He shall fully cooperate the Investigating Officer and will appear before him in the concerned police station as and when called in accordance with law;

(ii) Petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence or hamper the investigation in any manner whatsoever:

(iii) Petitioner will not leave India without prior permission of the Court.

(iv) Petitioner shall not make any inducement, threat or promise, directly or indirectly, to the Investigating Officer or any person acquainted with the facts of the case to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or any Police Officer;

(v) In case of launching of prosecution, petitioner shall attend the trial on every hearing, unless exempted in accordance with law.

(vi) Petitioner shall inform the Station House Officer of the concerned police station about his place of residence during bail and trial. Any change in the same shall also be communicated within two weeks thereafter.

Petitioner shall furnish details of his Aadhar Card, Telephone Number, E-mail, PAN Card, Bank Account Number, if any.

(vii) It is made clear that in case the petitioner arraigned as an accused in future, in any FIR under NDPS Act, then this bail is liable to be cancelled. It is open for the Investigating Agency to move appropriate application in that regard and that fact will also be considered as a negative factor in future bail application(s) of the petitioner.

In case of violation of any of the terms & conditions of the bail, respondent-State shall be at liberty to move appropriate application for cancellation of the bail. It is made clear that observations made above are only for the purpose of adjudication of instant bail petition and shall not be construed as an opinion on the merits of the matter. Learned trial Court shall decide the matter without being influenced by above observations.

With the aforesaid observations, the present petition stands disposed of, so also the pending miscellaneous applications, if any.

Copy Dasti.