Tripura High Court

Shri Sapam Romen Singh vs The State Of Tripura Represented ... on 8 October, 2021

                   HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
                         AGARTALA
                           BA 75 of 2021

Shri Sapam Romen Singh S/o Shri Lt. Sapam Jugeshor Singh,
Resident of Nepra Company, P.O. and P.S. Thoubal, Manipur
                                               -----Applicant(s)

                               Versus

The State of Tripura represented by Ld. Public Prosecutor, High
Court of Tripura
                                             -----Respondent(s)

                           BA 78 of 2021

Md. Mainul Haque S/o Md. Masuk Ali, resident of West
Yeazekhowra, P.O. and P.S. IRANI PS, Unakoti, Tripura
                                              -------Applicant(s)

                             Versus
The State of Tripura represented by Ld. Public Prosecutor, High
Court of Tripura
                                             -----Respondent(s)

                           BEFORE

      THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G. CHATTOPADHYAY
For Applicant(s)   : Ms. Sarama Deb, Adv.

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Ratan Datta, PP.


                            ORDER

08.10.2021

[1] Both the applications are taken up together for disposal

by a common order as they arise from the same incident.

[2] Applicants namely Sapam Romen Singh and Md.

Mainul Haque who have filed this bail application under Section

439 Cr.P.C are FIR named accused in Irani P. S. case number 035 of

2021 registered for offence punishable under Sections 21(c), 25, and

29 of the NDPS Act, 1985.

[3] Factual background of the case is as under:

Shri Pankaj Das, an Assistant Sub-Inspector of police of

Irani Police Station lodged a suo moto FIR with the Officer-in-

Charge of Irani Police Station on 05.06.2021 alleging, inter alia, that

the day before at about 7.30 p.m, he received an information from

his secret source that accused applicant Mainul Haque was selling

'yaba' tablets from his house along with his associates. Immediate

presence of police was required at the spot to apprehend Mainul

Haque and his associates. The complainant hurriedly recorded the

information in the General Diary of the police station vide Irani P.S.

DG Entry No.22 -04.06.2021and conveyed the said information to

his higher authorities. Without further delay, he along with inspector

Chaitanya Reang and other police staff including woman staff rushed

to the house of said accused applicant Mainul Haque in West

Yeazekhowra. Inspector Chaitanya Reang and other police staff

BA 75 of 2021 BA 78 of 2021

cordoned the area and raid was conducted in the house of the

accused. Feeling the presence of police, some unknown persons fled

away from the house. One of them fell on the ground while he was

trying to flee away. He also received injury in both of his legs. The

person was detained by police. He identified himself as accused

applicant Sapam Romen Singh and stated to police that he along

with his partner Mainul Haque were engaged in selling contraband to

local youths. He also stated to police that he came to the place on

03.06.2021 from Guwahati in a truck and he carried contraband

drugs with him from Guwahati. Following his statement, police

thoroughly searched the house of accused applicant Mainul Haque

and recovered 2165 'yaba' tablets in 11 blue packets and 2760 yaba

tablets in 14 black packets from the house of Mainul Haque. Total

4925 'yaba' tablets weighing 512.1 gm was thus recovered and

seized from the dwelling house of Mainul Haque along with several

smart mobile phones, 01 bundle silver foil etc. in presence of

witnesses. The local Panhayat Pradhan Hanis Miah and Upa Pradhan

Munim Ali appeared at the spot pursuant to a call received from

police and in their presence, the contraband was seized. House

owner accused Mainul Haque and his associate Sapam Romen Singh

were arrested by police and brought to the police station.

BA 75 of 2021 BA 78 of 2021

[4] On the basis of the said FIR case was registered and

investigation was taken up.

[5] Both the accused applicants have been undergoing

imprisonment since their arrest on 05.06.2021. They have thus

already suffered pre trial detention for a period of 4 months. The

charge against them is that commercial quantity of contraband

('yaba' tablets) was recovered from their possession which is an

offence punishable under Section 21(c) of the NDPS Act, 1985

punishment of which may extend to rigorous imprisonment for 20

years with fine. Minimum punishment prescribed for the offence is

rigorous imprisonment for 10 years. Charge under Section 25 of the

Act has also been brought against Mainul Haque as he permitted his

house premises to be used for commission of offence under the

NDPS Act. They have also been charged under Section 29 of the

NDPS Act as they were party to a criminal conspiracy pursuant to

which they stored contraband in the house of accused applicant

Mainul Haque for the purpose of selling the same to the local youths.

[6] In this back ground, Ms. Sarama Deb, learned advocate

appearing for the accused applicants urges for releasing them on bail

raising various grounds. One of the grounds is that both of them have

BA 75 of 2021 BA 78 of 2021

suffered pre trial incarnation for more than 4 months without

adequate proof. Counsel contends that the accused applicants have

fallen victim to a conspiracy. They are completely innocent and they

never indulged in selling of drugs at any point of time. It is further

argued by Ms.Deb, learned advocate that accused Sapam Romen

Singh has been suffering from cancer which is at its advanced stage.

Relying on the health status report dated 24.09.2021 of accused

applicant Sapam Romen Singh issued from the Regional Cancer

Centre of Agartala, counsel submits that the applicant has been

referred to TATA Memorial hospital for treatment. Counsel contends

that unless he is released on bail, he will die in jail for want of proper

treatment. Therefore, counsel urges the court to enlarge him on bail

on his health ground.

[7] With regard to the application submitted on behalf of

accused Mainul Haque, counsel submits that Mainul Haque's wife

has been suffering from serious gynecological problems for which

she needs the presence and support of her husband. Counsel submits

that they have a minor child and due to illness of the wife of Mainul

Haque, there is none at home to take care of their child. Counsel

submits that apart from the fact that there is no merit in the case,

BA 75 of 2021 BA 78 of 2021

court may consider for the release of the accused on bail on the

ground of the health condition of his wife.

[8] Heard Mr.Ratan Datta, learned Public Prosecutor,

representing the State respondent who in his usual fairness submits

that court may pass appropriate order on the application of accused

Sapam Romen Singh who has been suffering from cancer.

[9] With regard to the application of accused Mainul

Haque, Mr.Datta, learned PP, vehemently opposes his bail

application on the ground that he used his house premises as a center

for storage and selling of contraband and ruined the lives of local

youths and their families by making them drug addicts. Counsel

submits that he allowed his associates to live in his house to operate

the illegal business of drug peddling from there. Counsel submits

that no genuine ground has been made out for release of the accused

on bail.

[10] Mr.Datta, learned PP, further contends that since

commercial quantity of contraband was recovered from the

possession of the accused, the restrictions with regard to bail under

Section 37 of the NDPS Act will apply in this case and there is no

ground to overcome the restrictions under Section 37 and allow bail

BA 75 of 2021 BA 78 of 2021

to the accused. Counsel contends that if the accused is released on

bail, he will repeat the same offence and ruin the society. Counsel

urges the court to take into consideration the ramification of his

release on bail and reject his bail application.

[11] Perused the updated case diary and considered the

submissions made at the bar. In the course of investigation, police

has recorded the statements of the neighbours of accused Mainul

Haque who have supported the charge that said accused has been

using his dwelling house for storage and sell of drugs among the

local youths. The prosecution papers available in the CD indicates

that police conducted raid in his house pursuant to a secret

information in the presence of the Pradhan and Upa-Pradhan of the

village and recovered and seized commercial quantity of contraband

from the dwelling hut of the accused. Accused Mainul Haque along

with his partner Sapam Romen Singh was arrested at the spot and

contraband recovered from their possession was seized by police.

[12] In the case of KANWAR SINGH MEENA VS.

STATE OF RAJASTHAN reported in (2012) 12 SCC 180, the

Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that Section 439 Cr.P.C confers

very wide powers on the High Court and the court of Sessions. The

BA 75 of 2021 BA 78 of 2021

Apex Court in the said judgment laid down the parameters to be

considered for granting or refusing bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C

and observed as under:

"10. Thus, Section 439 of the Code confers very wide powers on the High Court and the Court of Session regarding bail. But, while granting bail, the High Court and the Sessions Court are guided by the same considerations as other courts. That is to say, the gravity of the crime, the character of the evidence, position and status of the accused with reference to the victim and witnesses, the likelihood of the accused fleeing from justice and repeating the offence, the possibility of his tampering with the witnesses and obstructing the course of justice and such other grounds are required to be taken into consideration. Each criminal case presents its own peculiar factual scenario and, therefore, certain grounds peculiar to a particular case may have to be taken into account by the court. The court has to only opine as to whether there is prima facie case against the accused. The court must not undertake meticulous examination of the evidence collected by the police and comment on the same. Such assessment of evidence and premature comments are likely to deprive the accused of a fair trial. .........................................."

[13] There is no doubt that the materials available on record

have made out a prima facie case against both of the petitioners.

They are charged with a serious offence for which severe

punishment has been prescribed under law. There are adequate

materials on record which indicate that accused applicant Mainul

Haque has been carrying out drug peddling over a quite long period

of time for which he used his own house premises. Likelihood of his

repeating the offence and possibility of his tampering with the

witnesses and obstructing the course of justice cannot be ruled out.

BA 75 of 2021 BA 78 of 2021

Therefore, this court is of the view that release of the accused Mainul

Haque on bail at this stage shall not be appropriate. In so far as the