Punjab-Haryana High Court
Vipin vs State Of Haryana on 10 April, 2024
2024:PHHC:049374
CRM-M-12032-2024 -1-
110
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
****
CRM-M-12032-2024
Date of Decision: 10.04.2024
Vipin ..... Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana ..... Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSH BUNGER
Present: Mr. N.S. Sodhi, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Kiran Pal Singh, AAG, Haryana.
*****
HARSH BUNGER J. (ORAL)
1. Petitioner (Vipin) has filed the present petition under Section
439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking grant of regular bail to the
petitioner in case FIR No.513, dated 18.08.2023, under Section 20 of the
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, registered at Police
Station City Ballabgarh, District Faridabad (Haryana).
2. Briefly, as per the aforesaid FIR, on 18.08.2023, ASI Roshan
Lal Singh along with ASI Vikram Singh was patrolling in a private vehicle at
Chungi No.5, Ballabgarh, when he received an information from a special
informer that Vipin (petitioner herein), would come near Vita Dairy,
Ballabgarh with the contraband-ganja patti. It was informed that if a picket
authenticity of this document/judgment
2024:PHHC:049374
is laid down, then said Vipin (petitioner) could be caught with the alleged
contraband. Considering the said information to be reliable, picket was laid
on the Milk Plant road near Vita Dairy after obtaining the due permission
from the SHO concerned. After a while, a boy, carrying black bag on his
shoulder, was seen coming and on the basis of suspicion, ASI Jagjit Singh,
with the help of fellow officials, apprehended the aforesaid person and on
asking, he told his name as Vipin (petitioner). Thereafter, the aforesaid
person was made aware of his rights to get his personal search as well as the
search of his bag (since some intoxicating articles were suspected therein) to
be conducted in the presence of any Gazetted Officer or Magistrate, to
which, he responded to be searched in the presence of a Gazetted Officer.
Accordingly, Duty Magistrate was called for at the spot. The alleged bag
held in the hand of the said Vipin, was searched and one polythene was
found, containing ganja-patti, weighing 3 kg 300 grams. Accordingly, the
aforesaid FIR was registered.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is
innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is
submitted that even otherwise, the alleged recovery is 3 kg 300 grams of
ganja patti, which falls in the category of "intermediate quantity", therefore,
rigors of Section 37 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act,
1985 are not attracted in this case. Learned counsel submits that the
petitioner is not involved in any other case. Learned counsel for the
petitioner contends that the bail application under Section 439 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, filed on behalf of the petitioner before the Court of
learned Additional Sessions Judge, Faridabad has been wrongly declined
authenticity of this document/judgment
2024:PHHC:049374
vide order dated 23.02.2024 (Annexure P-1). Learned counsel for the
petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 18.08.2023. It is
further submitted that the investigation in this case is complete; challan
stands presented and even charges have been framed on 17.02.2024. It is
stated that there are total 12 prosecution witnesses, however, none has been
examined till date. Hence, the conclusion of trial is likely to take some time
and no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner behind the
bars. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is ready to
abide by all the conditions as may be imposed by this Court or by the trial
Court. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner is also willing to
furnish security in the form of Fixed Deposit Receipt (F.D.R.) before the
concerned Court, so as to ensure his presence before the Court on each and
every date of hearing. Accordingly, prayer for grant of regular bail is made.
4. Leaned State counsel has opposed the plea of petitioner for
grant of regular bail on the ground of seriousness and gravity of the offence,
however, it is not disputed that the alleged contraband recovered from the
possession of the petitioner falls in the category of "intermediate quantity",
therefore, the rigors of Section 37 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic
Substances Act, 1985 are not attracted in this case. It is also not disputed that
the charges have already been framed and none of the witnesses has been
examined till date. Learned State counsel has also not disputed that the
petitioner is not involved in any other case. However, learned State counsel
further states that there is an apprehension that in the event of bail, the
petitioner may abscond to delay the trial. Accordingly, prayer has been made
for dismissal of the present petition.
authenticity of this document/judgment
2024:PHHC:049374
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
paper book.
6. In the instant case, the petitioner is in custody since 18.08.2023,
challan stands presented; and charges have been framed on 17.02.2024,
therefore, trial in this case is likely to take some time to conclude and the
alleged recovered contraband falls in the category of intermediate quantity,
therefore, rigors of Section 37 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic
Substances Act, 1985 are not attracted in this case.
7. Hon'ble Apex Court in case titled Dataram Singh v. State of
Uttar Pradesh & Anr, 2018(2) RCR (Criminal) 131, has held that freedom
of an individual cannot be curtailed for indefinite period, especially when
his/her guilt is yet to be proved. It has been further held by the Hon'ble Apex
Court in the aforesaid judgement that a person is believed to be innocent
until found guilty.
8. Hon'ble Apex Court in case titled Umarmia Alias Mamumia v.
State of Gujarat, (2017) 2 SCC 731, has held delay in criminal trial to be in
violation of right guaranteed to an accused under Article 21 of the
Constitution of India.
9. In Manoranjana Sinh alias Gupta v. CBI, (2017) 5 SCC 218,
Hon'ble Apex Court has held that the object of the bail is to secure the
attendance of the accused in the trial and the proper test to be applied in the
solution of the question whether bail should be granted or refused is whether
it is probable that the party will appear to take his trial.
10. Pertinently, appropriate directions can be issued for securing the
attendance of the petitioner in the trial.
authenticity of this document/judgment
2024:PHHC:049374
11. So far as the apprehension expressed by learned State counsel
that the petitioner may abscond in order to delay the trial, suffice it to state
that in the event of any such conduct, the prosecution can always approach
the competent Court for cancellation of bail. Accordingly, it is observed that
the State/Prosecuting Agency/State police shall be at liberty to observe the
behaviour of the petitioner during the bail period, and in case it feels that the
petitioner is indulging in influencing any of the witnesses or tampering with
the prosecution evidence in any manner or otherwise causing interference
with the progress of trial, it shall be open for the State/Prosecuting
Agency/State police to move to the trial Court for cancellation of the bail,
which shall be decided by the trial Court on merits.
12. In view of the above discussion, present petition is allowed and
the petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail subject to his
furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Illaqa
Magistrate/Duty Magistrate concerned. However, the concerned Station
House Officer shall be informed about the release of petitioner and the
petitioner shall inform the concerned Station House Officer about his
address at which he intends to reside during the pendency of case/trial and
any change in the address shall be communicated to the concerned Station
House Officer, forthwith. The petitioner would also furnish his telephone
number to the concerned Station House Officer. He would also furnish his
undertaking to the effect that he will not indulge in any illegal activity. The
petitioner shall also appear before the concerned Police Station/Station
House Officer on first Monday of every month till the conclusion of trial.
13. In addition, the petitioner (or anyone on his behalf) shall
authenticity of this document/judgment
2024:PHHC:049374
prepare a Fixed Deposit Receipt (F.D.R.) in the sum of Rs.50,000/- and
submit the same with the trial Court. The same would be liable to be
forfeited as per law, in case the petitioner remains absent from trial without
any sufficient cause.
14. Nothing expressed hereinabove shall be construed to be an
observation on merits of the case and the facts and circumstances recorded
above are only for consideration of the prayer for bail at this stage.
15. The petition is accordingly disposed of.
16. All pending application(s), if any, shall also stand closed.
10.04.2024 (HARSH BUNGER)
Himani JUDGE
1. Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
2. Whether reportable : Yes/No
authenticity of this document/judgment
