Sh. Tul Bhadur Budha vs State Of Himachal Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 409 HP

                                          1




       IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA




                                                                                            .
                                                  Cr.MP(M) No.: 2270 of 2020





                              Date of Decision: 07.01.2021
______________________________________________________________________





Sh. Tul Bhadur Budha                                  .....Petitioner.

                                                  Vs.
State of Himachal Pradesh                                                               .....Respondent.





Coram:
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge
Whether approved for reporting?1No.

For the petitioner:                               Mr. Maan Singh, Advocate.

For the respondent:                               M/s Sumesh Raj, Dinesh Thakur &
                                                  Sanjeev Sood,    Additional Advocate
                                                  Generals, with Ms. Divya Sood,


                                                  Deputy Advocate General.
                                                  (Through Video Conferencing)

Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral):

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. 55, dated 17.02.2020, registered under Sections 20 and 29 of the

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act at Police Station

Bhuntar, District Kullu, H.P.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the

petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the case. He

further submitted that the petitioner is not guilty of the offences alleged

1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment?

against him and he has been wrongly implicated in the case without

appreciating that he had no connection with the other accused in the

.

matter. He also submitted that in the event of bail being granted to the

petitioner, he shall abide by all the conditions which may be imposed by

the Court.

4. Opposing the bail petition, learned Additional Advocate

General has argued that in fact a huge quantity of about 8 Kgs. Charas

was recovered from the accused named in the FIR concerned, who are

four in number. According to him, role of the petitioner was well

established during the course of investigation. In addition, there are CDR

details which point towards monetary transactions, implicating the

petitioner with the committal of the offence. He further argued that the

petitioner happens to be a resident of Nepal and taking into consideration

the gravity of the offence alleged against him, there is every possibility

that in the event of being released, he may jump the bail and, thus, be

not available for trial and he may also try to influence the witnesses etc.

On these grounds, he submitted that the bail petition be dismissed.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and also

gone through the pleadings made in the petition.

6. Keeping in view the fact that about 8 Kgs. Charas was

recovered from the bus in which the petitioner was travelling alongwith

other co­accused and further that the petitioner happens to be a Nepali

citizen and also that CDR transactions, as per the investigation, point out

towards exchange of money, involving the present petitioner, this Court

finds no merit in the present petition, as it concurs with the submissions

.

made by learned Additional Advocate General that gravity of the offence

does not warrants release of the petitioner on bail and further there is

possibility that if released on bail, the petitioner may flee the Country and

may thus be not available for trial. Accordingly, this petition is dismissed.

(Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge January 07, 2021 (bhupender)