Himachal Pradesh High Court
Ajay Singh vs State Of Himachal Pradesh on 22 March, 2021
Author: Ajay Mohan Goel
Bench: Ajay Mohan Goel
.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Cr.MP(M) No.35 of 2021
Decided on: 22.03.2021
Ajay Singh ....Petitioner.
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh ...Respondent.
Coram
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?1
For the petitioner : Mr. S.K. Banyal, Advocate.
For the respondent : Mr. Dinesh Thakur and Mr. Sanjeev Sood,
Additional Advocate Generals.
Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral)
By way of this petition, a prayer has been made for release of the petitioner on bail in case F.I.R. No.70 of 2016, dated 14.03.20216, registered under Sections 20, 61 & 85 of the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (hereinafter referred to 'NDPC'' for short) Act, 1985, at Police Station Sadar, Mandi, District Mandi, H.P.
2. When this case was listed before the Court on 05.03.2021, the following order was passed:-
1Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?::: Downloaded on - 22/03/2021 19:56:00 :::HCHP 2
.
"Status report filed, which is ordered to be taken on record.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner was arrested after lodging of FIR in issue on 16th March, 2016 and since then, he is in custody. He has also relied upon the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Amrit Singh Moni Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh, Criminal Appeal No.668 of 2020, decided on 12th October, 2020, in which case, Hon'ble Supreme Court was pleased to grant bail to the petitioner therein, who was also charged for having committed offences under the provisions of Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 involving commercial quantity, inter alia, on the ground that the petitioner therein had completed more than two years and seven months of actual custody. On the strength of the said judgment, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as there is no considerable progress in the trial, it will be in the interest of justice in case this petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail.
Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Additional Advocate General and perused the status report, before any further order is passed, the State is directed to produce the record on the next date of hearing, to enable the Court to ascertain as to how the trial has progressed.::: Downloaded on - 22/03/2021 19:56:00 :::HCHP 3
.
As prayed for, list on 15th March, 20201."
3. Thereafter, on 15.03.2021, the following order was passed:-
"The Court stands informed that evidence of the prosecution witnesses was closed by the learned Trial Court on 19th September, 2019, and thereafter, statement of the accused under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure could not be recorded. The Court has further been informed that now the case has been listed before the learned Court below on 18th of March, 2021.
As prayed for, list on 22.03.2021. Learned Deputy Advocate General is instructed to convey to the learned Public Prosecutor to impress upon the learned Court below to fix a date immediately for recording statement of accused under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure."
4. Today, the Court stands informed that now the matter is listed before learned Court below, on 26.04.2021, for proper orders only.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the status report filed as well as other documents appended with the petition.
::: Downloaded on - 22/03/2021 19:56:00 :::HCHP 4.
6. It is not in dispute that after lodging of the F.I.R., the petitioner is in custody since 14.03.2016. The progress of the case till date after lodging of the F.I.R. is that still the statement of accused under Section 313 of the Criminal Procedure Code is to be record.
7. In Amrit Singh Moni Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh, Criminal Appeal No.668 of 2020, decided on 12th October, 2020, Hon,ble Supreme Court, in an appeal preferred before it against the order passed by this Court in a bail petition filed under Section 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code was pleased to hold as under:-
"According to the case of the prosecution, in a vehicle occupied by five persons including the appellant, contraband material ("Charas") weighing 3285 grams was found concealed behind the panel of the front left side door of the vehicle.
It is accepted that seven witnesses have already been examined in the trial and seven more witnesses are yet to be examined. The last witness was examined in February 2020 whereafter there is no further progress in the trial because of the Covid-19 pandemic situation. It is also accepted that the appellant was taken in custody on 23.02.2018 and, as such, he has completed more than 2 years 7 months of actual custody.::: Downloaded on - 22/03/2021 19:56:00 :::HCHP 5
.
Considering the facts and circumstances on record, in our view, the appellant is entitled to the benefit under Section 439 of the Code. We order accordingly."
8. Coming to the facts of this case, the petitioner is in custody since for the last almost five years now and admittedly, there is no situation.
r to satisfactory progress in the trial because of the Covid-19 pandemic
9. In this background, this petition is allowed, as prayed for and petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on the terms and conditions to be so imposed upon him in this order keeping in view the fact that the petitioner is in custody for the last almost five years as in similar circumstances, Hon'ble Supreme Court has been pleased to release an accused under NDPS Act, charge against whom was with regard to commercial quantity of 'Charas', on bail, on the ground that the accused had completed more than two years and seven months of actual custody and the trial was not progressing on account of Covid-19 pandemic situation.
10. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that he has instruction to submit that in the event of grant of bail, the petitioner ::: Downloaded on - 22/03/2021 19:56:00 :::HCHP 6 .
shall not leave the territory of the State of Himachal Pradesh without the leave of the Court. His statement is taken on record.
11. Accordingly, this petition is allowed, by ordering the release of petitioner on bail in F.I.R. No.70 of 2016, dated 14.03.20216, registered under Sections 20, 61 & 85 of the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Act, 1985, at Police Station Sadar, Mandi, District Mandi, H.P., on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court, subject to the following conditions:-
i) Petitioner shall attend the trial Court on each and every date of hearing and if prevented by any reason to do so, seek exemption from appearance by filing appropriate application;
ii) He shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;
iii) He shall not make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case.
iv)Undertaking of the petitioner through Counsel is taken on record that the petitioner shall not leave the territorial limits of the State of H.P. without the permission of learned Trial Court.
12. It is clarified that the findings which have been returned by this Court while deciding this petition are only for the purpose of ::: Downloaded on - 22/03/2021 19:56:00 :::HCHP 7 .
adjudication of the present bail application and learned trial Court shall not be influenced by any of the findings so returned by this Court in the adjudication of this petition during the trial of the case. It is further clarified that in case the petitioner does not complies with the conditions which have been imposed upon him while granting the present bail, the State shall be at liberty to approach this Court for the cancellation of the bail. The petition stands disposed of in the above terms.
Copy dasti.
(Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge March 22, 2021 (Rishi) ::: Downloaded on - 22/03/2021 19:56:00 :::HCHP