Himachal Pradesh High Court

Reserved On: 12.08.2024 vs State Of Himachal Pradesh on 24 August, 2024

Author: Sushil Kukreja

Bench: Sushil Kukreja

1 ( 2024:HHC:7325 )

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

Cr. MP(M) No. 1586 of 2024 Reserved on: 12.08.2024 Decided on: 24.08.2024

Jobanpreet Singh ....Petitioner

Versus

State of Himachal Pradesh ....Respondent

Coram The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sushil Kukreja, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner : Mr. Piyush Sharma, Advocate.

For the respondent : Mr. Raj Negi and Ms. Niyati Thakur, Deputy Advocates General.

Sushil Kukreja, Judge

By way of instant petition, filed under Section 483

of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita , the petitioner is

seeking bail in case F.I.R. No. 75/2023, dated 17.07.2023,

registered at Police Station East, Shimla, H.P., under

Sections 21, 29 & 25 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic

Substances Act (hereinafter referred to as "NDPS Act").

1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

2 ( 2024:HHC:7325 )

2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that on

17.07.2023, while the police party was on routine patrolling

duty at Shakrala-Mehli-Malyana road and around 12:10 a.m.,

when they reached Krishna Dhaba, they saw a vehicle,

bearing registration No. HP10A-1363 parked by the right side

of the road, in which, four persons were sitting. The police

party asked them as to what they were doing in the vehicle

during midnight, but they could not give any satisfactory

answer. On suspicion, the police party tried to associate

independent witnesses from the spot, however, no one was

ready to be associated in the proceedings and in the absence

of any independent witness, Constables Dinesh Kumar No.

746 and Varun Joshi No. 289 were associated as witnesses

in the proceedings. In presence of the aforesaid witnesses,

the person sitting on the driver seat disclosed his name as

Vijay Chauhan, the person sitting on co-driver seat disclosed

his name as Jobanpreet Singh (petitioner herein) and the

persons sitting on the rear seat of the vehicle disclosed their

names as Mandeep Singh, S/o Sh. Ramanjeet Singh and

Mandeep Singh, S/o Sh. Baljeet Singh. During search of the 3 ( 2024:HHC:7325 )

vehicle, from the console/armrest, a light yellow coloured

substance was recovered from a transparent polythene

packet, which on the basis of experience was found to be

chitta/heroin. On weighment, the recovered contraband was

found to be 13.78 grams. Thereafter, the police completed all

the codal formalities and FIR as detailed hereinabove was

registered against the accused persons and they were

arrested on 17.07.2023.

3. The bail petition has been filed on the ground

that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely

implicated. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that

investigation in this case is complete and nothing remains to

be recovered at the instance of the petitioner. He further

contended that one of the co-accused namely Mandeep

Singh, S/o Sh. Ramanjeet Singh has already been released

on bail by this Court on 25.08.2023 and as such, the

petitioner may also be released on the ground of parity.

4. Per contra, learned Deputy Advocate General

opposed the bail application on the ground that keeping in

view the gravity of the offence alleged to have been 4 ( 2024:HHC:7325 )

committed by the petitioner, he is not entitled to be enlarged

on bail. He further contended that the petitioner is a habitual

offender and one more case i.e. FIR No. 32/2023, under

Sections 302, 341, 323, 34, 120B of IPC & Section 3(1) (L)

(A) of SC & ST Act at Police Station Jhander, Amritsar

(Punjab) has been registered against him, as such, he does

not deserve to be released on bail.

5. I have heard the learned counsel for the

petitioner as well as learned Additional Advocate General and

have also gone through the record of the case. The perusal of

the record indicates that the quantity of chitta/heroin, involved

in the present case is 13.78 grams, which is an intermediate

quantity. Therefore, rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act are

not applicable in the present case. The petitioner was

arrested on 17.07.2023 and since then he is behind the bars.

There is no evidence on record to suggest that the petitioner

will tamper with the prosecution evidence or will flee from

justice, if released on bail. Moreover, the trial may take

sufficiently long time to conclude, therefore, no fruitful

purpose will be served if the petitioner is kept behind the bars 5 ( 2024:HHC:7325 )

for an unlimited period. Furthermore, one of the co-accused

namely Mandeep Singh, S/o Sh. Ramanjeet Singh has

already been released on bail by this Court, as such, the

petitioner also deserves to be released on bail on the ground

of parity.

6. The learned Additional Advocate General

contended that petitioner is a habitual offender as one case

under Sections 302, 341, 323, 34, 120B of IPC & Section 3(1)

(L) (A) of SC & ST at Police Station Jhander, Amritsar

(Punjab) Act has been registered against him, therefore, he is

not entitled to be released on bail. However, learned counsel

for the petitioner has placed on record the copy of judgment

dated 19.07.2024, passed by learned Additional Sessions

Judge, Amritsar (Punjab) in Case No. SC/791/2023,

whereby the petitioner has been acquitted in the said case.

7. Hence, considering the overall facts and

circumstances of the case, since the quantity of chitta/heroin

involved in this case is 13.78 grams, which is an intermediate

quantity, coupled with the fact that one of the co-accused

namely Mandeep Singh, S/o Sh. Ramanjeet Singh has 6 ( 2024:HHC:7325 )

already been released on bail, this Court finds that the

present is a fit case where judicial discretion to admit the

petitioner on bail is required to be exercised in his favour.

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed and it is ordered

that the petitioner, who has been arrested by the police, in

case F.I.R. No. 75/2023, dated 17.07.2023, registered at

Police Station East, Shimla, H.P., under Sections 21, 29 & 25

of the NDPS Act. shall be forthwith released on bail, subject

to his furnishing personal bond to the tune of Rs. 2,00,000/-

(Rupees two lacs), with one local surety of District Shimla in

the like amount, to the satisfaction of learned Trial Court. This

bail order is subject, however, to the following conditions:-

(i) that the petitioner will appear before the Court and the Investigating Officer whenever required ;

(ii) that he will 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 any facts to the Court or the police;

(iii) that he will not tamper with the prosecution evidence nor he will try to win over the Prosecution witnesses or terrorise them in any manner;

(iv) that he will not repeat the offence, as is alleged to have been committed by him.

7 ( 2024:HHC:7325 )

(v) that he will not deliberately and intentionally act in a manner which may tend to delay the investigation or the trial of the case.

(vi) that he will not leave India without prior permission of the Court.

8. Needless to say that the Investigating agency

shall be at liberty to move this Court for cancellation of the

bail, if any of the aforesaid conditions is violated by the

petitioner.

9. Be it stated that any expression of opinion given

in this order does not mean an expression of opinion on the

merits of the case and the trial Court will not be influenced by

any observations made therein.

10. The Registry is directed to forward a soft copy of

the bail order to the Superintendent, District Jail Kaithu,

Shimla, through e-mail, with a direction to enter the date of

grant of bail in the e-prison software.

11. In case, the petitioner is not released within a

period of seven days from the date of grant of bail, the

Superintendent, District Jail Kaithu, Shimla is directed to

inform this fact to the Secretary, DLSA, Shimla. The 8 ( 2024:HHC:7325 )

Superintendent, District Jail Kaithu, Shimla, is further

directed that if the petitioner fails to furnish the bail bonds, as

per the order passed by this Court, within a period of one

month from today, the said fact be submitted to this Court.




                                                              (Sushil Kukreja)
  August 24, 2024                                                  Judge
     (raman)w





     SANJE
                       DN: C=IN, O=HIGH COURT OF
                       HIMACHAL PRADESH, OU=HIGH
                       COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
                       SHIMLA, Phone=

12be943efdbad8b279500bb42b5e6dd073 7d33dc3ae8f941ae5ee10f339bc8c3,

EV PostalCode=171001, S=Himachal Pradesh, SERIALNUMBER= c5d3da9bf2af806bd1a430f3a5aac1e496d 044668881d74227d097cf6db7f8e2, CN= SANJEEV SETHI

SETHI Reason: I am approving this document Location: