AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
15 paragraphs · 837 words.
Ajay Mohan Goel, J
Status report filed, which is perused and ordered to be taken on record.
By way of this petition filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the petitioner has prayed for grant of bail in FIR No. 20 of 2022, dated 15.01.2022, registered under Sections 21, 61-85 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the NDPS Act’) at Police Station Nurpur, District Kangra, H.P.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is a Painter by profession and he has been falsely implicated in the case. He has further submitted that the petitioner is not guilty of the offences alleged to have been committed by him. The petitioner is in custody since 15.01.2022 and taking into consideration the fact that the allegation against him is that 7. 05 grams of heroin was recovered from him and co-accused, which is an intermediate quantity, it will be in the interest of justice in case the petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail, because no purpose is going to be served by detaining him in custody, more so, because the trial is already underway.
The petition is opposed by the learned Additional Advocate General, inter alia, on the ground that the petitioner is a habitual offender and earlier also, he has been booked for having committed offences under the provisions of the NDPS Act. He further submitted that the case is at the stage of recording the statement of prosecution witnesses and if released on bail at this stage, the petitioner may try to influence or win over the prosecution witnesses, which will hamper the fair trial. Accordingly, he submitted that the present petition be dismissed.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the status report as well as other documents appended with the petition.
It is not in dispute that the petitioner is in custody since 15.01.2022 in the present case and the allegation against him is that he and co-accused were found in possession of 7. 05 grams heroin as on the date of arrest. Though it is a matter of record that earlier also, the petitioner has been booked under the provisions of the NDPS Act, meaning thereby that the present offence has been committed by him while on bail, but this Court is of the considered view that as the petitioner is in custody for more than one year, it will be in the interest of justice in case the present application is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail. As far as the apprehension of learned Additional Advocate General is concerned, the same is being taken care of by the Court and it is observed that in case the petitioner tries to influence or win over any of the witnesses and in case he violates any of the conditions that are being imposed upon him, then the State will be at liberty to move an application for cancellation of the bail in the present petition itself.
Accordingly, the petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in FIR No. 20 of 2022, dated 15.01.2022, registered under Sections 21, 61-85 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 at Police Station Nurpur, District Kangra, H.P., subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of rupees twenty five thousand with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of concerned Chief Judicial Magistrate/ Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate/Judicial Magistrate First Class. The petitioner shall also abide by the following conditions:-
“(a) He shall attend the Trial Court on each and every date of hearing and if prevented by any reason to do so, seek exemption from appearance by filing appropriate application;
(b) He shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence nor hamper the investigation of the case in any manner whatsoever;
(c) He shall not make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or the Police Officer; and
(d) He will not leave the territorial jurisdiction of the Trial Court without the leave of the Court."
It is clarified that the findings which have been returned by this Court while deciding this petition are only for the purpose of adjudication of the present bail application and learned Trial Court shall not be influenced by any of the findings so returned by this Court in the adjudication of this petition during trial of the case. It is further clarified that in case the petitioner does not comply with the conditions which have been imposed upon him while granting the present bail, the State shall be at liberty to approach this Court for the cancellation of bail. The petition stands disposed in above terms.
Downloaded copy of this judgment is valid for compliance.