The Himachal Pradesh High Court in a bench comprising Hon’ble Justice Rakesh Kainthla dismissed a petition, filed by the petitioner for seeking her pre-arrest bail in F.I.R. dated 14.04.2023. The Court observed that merely because Section 37 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as “NDPS Act”) does not apply, a person involved in the commission of an offence punishable under the NDPS Act cannot be released on bail.
Brief Facts:
The police were on patrolling duty when secret information was received by SHO that Pawanjeet cultivated opium in his field adjacent to his house and in case of search, a huge quantity of opium plant could be recovered. The police went to the house of Pawanjit Singh. The present petitioner was found in the house. The search of the house and the field was conducted in her presence and the presence of witnesses. Opium Poppy plants were found amongst the onion plants. These were checked and were found to be 59. During the investigation, the police prepared a rukka and registered the F.I.R. The report of the chemical analyst stated that opium poppy plants were opium plants.
Contentions of the Petitioner:
The Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the Petitioner is innocent and she was falsely implicated. There is no evidence on record to show that the petitioner is cultivating the land. He further submitted that the petitioner will abide by all the terms and conditions, which may be imposed by the Court upon her. Hence, he prayed that the present bail petition be allowed.
Contentions of the Respondent:
The Learned Counsel for the Respondent submitted that the petitioner is involved in the commission of a heinous offence and the bail should not be granted to her. Police have already recorded the statements of the co-sharers Raj Kumar and Ashwani Kumar have already filed their affidavits. He submitted that the husband of the petitioner is residing away from the village and the petitioner is in possession of the land, therefore, he prayed that the present petition be dismissed.
Observations of the Court:
The Court noted that the police recorded the statements of witnesses that the petitioner’s husband is not residing at home due to a dispute with the petitioner and other co-sharers. The other co-sharers also made a statement that the petitioner was in possession of the land where the opium plants were found.
The Court observed that even where the rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act do not apply, the bail cannot be claimed as a matter of right. Each case has to be adjudged on its facts. Merely because Section 37 of the NDPS Act does not apply, a person involved in the commission of an offence punishable under the NDPS Act cannot be released on bail.
The decision of the Court:
The Himachal Pradesh High Court, dismissing the petition, held that the petitioner is not entitled to pre-arrest bail in the present case.
Case Title: Rekha Kumari v State of Himachal Pradesh
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rakesh Kainthla
Case No.: Cr. MPM No. 3032 of 2023
Advocate for the Petitioner: Mr. Ashwani Kaundal
Advocate for the Respondents: Mr. Jitender Sharma
Read Judgment @LatestLaws.com
Picture Source :
