Himachal Pradesh High Court
Of Shri Thakur Dass vs Unknown on 21 September, 2022
Bench: Vivek Singh Thakur
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA.
ON THE 21st DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2022
.
BEFORE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIVEK SINGH THAKUR
CRIMINAL MISC. PETITION (MAIN) No.1594 OF 2022
Between:-
BUDH RAM AGED 42 YEARS, SON
OF SHRI THAKUR DASS,
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE JANA, PO
ARCHANDI, TEHSIL AND
DISTRICT KULLU HP
r ....PETITIONER
(BY SH. YASHVEER SINGH RATHORE, ADVOCATE)
AND
STATE OF H.P.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SHRI HEMANT VAID, ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE GENERAL)
Whether approved for reporting?
This petition coming on for orders this day, the Court passed the following:
ORDER
Petitioner, invoking Section 439 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, have approached this Court for grant of bail in
case FIR No. 228 of 2020, dated 20.8.2020, registered under
Section 20, 25 and 29 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic
Substances Act ( for short 'NDPS Act'), in Police Station Sadar
Kullu, District Kullu, Himachal Pradesh.
2. Status Report stands filed. Record was also made available.
.
3. As per status report, Kali Dass, owner-cum-driver of vehicle
No. HP-34C-5687, while driving the car along with two passengers
namely Budh Ram and Govind, was stopped by police on
19.8.2020 at 9 PM for checking. Budh Ram was sitting on front
seat of car whereas Govind with a bag was sitting on rear seat. As
per status report, occupants of vehicle were perplexed leading to
suspicion of transportation of some illegal articles or narcotic drug.
Whereupon, for non-availability of independent witnesses, police
officials were associated in search and seizure process and vehicle
was checked. Govind sitting on rear seat was hiding a rucksack
bag in between his legs. On checking whereof, 1.596 Kg. charas
was recovered. After following the procedure, charas was taken in
possession and seized and by sending a Ruka to Police Station, FIR
was register. Investigation was completed and all three occupants
of vehicle were arrested for transporting the contraband. Since
then, after remaining in police custody, petitioner is in judicial
custody.
4. Prosecution case is that during investigation, Govind
disclosed that he, along with Kali Dass and Budh Ram, was
returning to Ramshilla with contraband, purchased by Budh Ram
from someone in village Jana for a consideration of Rs. 2 lacs but
on way, they were intercepted by police. On the basis of this
disclosure all three persons were arrayed as accused and challan
.
was presented against all of them in Court on 12.01.2021.
5. As per State FSL report, recovered contraband has been
confirmed to be charas.
6. It has been submitted by learned counsel for petitioner that
even if prosecution story is considered to be true as it is, then
also, there is noting on record to connect petitioner Budh Ram
with recovered contraband as charas as alleged, has been
recovered from Govind who, after taking lift from Kali Dass, was
travelling in car independently whereas Kali Dass, owner of
vehicle, was driving the vehicle and petitioner Budh Ram had also
taken lift in his car, who was sitting on front seat of vehicle. It has
been further submitted that nothing has been recovered either
from Budh Ram or from car but contraband has been recovered
from rucksack bag of Govind, whereas petitioner was not knowing
about transportation of contraband by Govind.
7. Learned counsel for petitioner has referred order dated
10.01.2022 passed by Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal
(Crl.) No. 242 of 2022, titled as State by (NCB) Bengaluru vs.
Pallulabid Ahamad Arimutta and another, wherein taking note of
earlier judgment passed by the Supreme Court in Tofan Singh vs.
State of Tamil Nadu, (2021)4 SCC 1, Supreme Court has upheld
grant of bail to the accused persons, who were arrayed as accused
and arrested on the basis of disclosure statement of co-accused
.
only, but without having any admissible evidence against them
except the disclosure statement of co-accused and Call Detail
Records(CDRs).
8. By referring the aforesaid judgment in Pallulabid Ahamad
Aributta's case, it has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner
that in present case also petitioner Budh Ram has falsely been
implicated, only on the basis of statement of co-accused and
therefore, in view of pronouncement of the Supreme Court, he
deserves to be enlarged on bail.
9. Learned counsel for petitioner has also submitted that
petitioner is behind the bars since last more than two years, i.e.
19.8.2020, and there is no criminal history of petitioner about his
involvement in criminal case, as evident from status report, much
less any case involving an offence under NDPS Act and petitioner
is not habitual offender and there is no possibility of his fleeing
from justice being local resident of area and he is also ready to
abide by any condition imposed by Court and to furnish bail bonds
to the satisfaction of Court in case he is enlarged on bail.
10. Learned Additional Advocate General has opposed the grant
of bail on the ground that petitioner has been found transporting
1.596 Kg. charas in the car as it has been recovered from Govind
tranvelling in the same car and offence committed by petitioner is
affecting not only the individual but also society at large and
.
therefore, it has been pleaded that petitioner is not entitled for
bail.
11. Considering the facts and circumstances narrated in
prosecution story including recovery of contraband from rucksack
bag, allegedly being in possession of co-accused Govind and
r to
period of detention as well as other material placed before me and
also taking note of the factors and parameters, required to be
considered at the time of adjudication of bail application, as
propounded in various pronouncements of the Courts including
the Supreme Court, I am of opinion that at this stage, without
commenting upon the claims and counter-claims of prosecution
and learned counsel for petitioner/accused petitioner can be
enlarged on bail.
12. Accordingly, petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on
bail, at this stage, subject to furnishing personal bond in the sum
of Rs. 1,50,000/-with one surety in the like amount to the
satisfaction of trial Court within a period of two weeks from today
and also subject to any further conditions to be imposed by trial
Court for assuring his presence during trial including the following
further conditions:-
(i) That the petitioner shall make himself
available during the investigation as
well as trial on each and every date as
and when required;
.
(iii) That the petitioner shall not directly or
indirectly 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 Court or to any police officer or
tamper with the evidence. He shall not,
in any manner, try to overawe or
influence or intimidate the prosecution
witnesses;
(iv) That the petitioner shall not obstruct the
smooth progress of the investigation as
well as trial;
(v) That the petitioner shall not jump over
the bail and shall inform, in writing,
regarding change of address, land line
number and/or mobile number, if any, in
advance, to concerned Police Station;
(vi) That the petitioner shall not commit the
offence similar to the offence to which
he is accused or suspected or the
commission of which he is suspected;
(vii) In the event of repetition of commission
of offence, bail granted in present case
shall be liable to be cancelled on taking
appropriate steps by prosecution/police;
(viii) That the petitioner shall not leave India
without prior permission of Court;
(ix) That petitioner shall not misuse his liberty
in any manner.
.
19 It will be open to the prosecution to apply for imposing
any such other or further condition on the petitioner as deemed
necessary in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the
interest of justice. It will also be open to the trial Court/Magistrate
to impose any other or further condition on the petitioner as it
may deem necessary in the interest of justice.
20 In case the petitioner violates any condition imposed
upon him, his bail shall be liable to be cancelled. In such
eventuality, prosecution may approach the competent Court of
law for cancellation of bail in accordance with law.
21 Learned trial Court is directed to comply with the
directions issued by the High Court, vide communication No.
HHC/VIG/Misc.Instructions/93-IV.7139 dated 18.3.2013.
22 Any observation made in this order shall not affect the
merits of case in any manner and will strictly confine for the
disposal of this bail application filed under Section 439 of Code of
Criminal Procedure 1973.
The petitioner is permitted to produce copy of order
downloaded from the High Court website and the trial Court shall
not insist for certified copy of the order, however, they may verify
the order from the High Court website or otherwise.
Petition stands disposed of.
.
September 21,2022 (Vivek Singh Thakur)
(ms) Judge
r to
