Himachal Pradesh High Court
Akhil Bhardwaj vs State Of Himachal Pradesh on 26 August, 2019
Author: Chander Bhusan Barowalia
Bench: Chander Bhusan Barowalia
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr.MP(M) No. 1286 of 2019 Decided on: 26th August, 2019 .
Akhil Bhardwaj ....Petitioner
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh ...Respondent
Coram
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Chander Bhusan Barowalia, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?1Yes.
For the petitioner: Mr. P.S. Goverdhan, Advocate.
For the respondent/State: Mr. Shiv Pal Manhans, Additional r Advocate General, with Mr. Raju Ram Rahi and Mr. Gaurav Sharma, Deputy Advocates General.
______________________________________________________________________ Chander Bhusan Barowalia, Judge. (oral).
The present bail application has been maintained by the petitioner under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking his release in case FIR No. 129 of 2019, dated 06.06.2019, under Sections 21 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, registered in Police Station Solan, District Solan, H.P.
2. As per the averments made in the petition, the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He is resident of the place and neither in a position to tamper with the 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes.
::: Downloaded on - 29/09/2019 02:35:21 :::HCHP 2prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice. No fruitful purpose will be served by keeping him behind the bars for an unlimited period, so he be released on bail.
.
3. Police report stands filed. As per the prosecution story, on 05.06.2019 a police party was on routine patrol duty at place Saproon Chowk. At about 08:30 p.m., police got a tip-off that near Hotel Paragon, in the ground floor of Batra Niwas, one Subodh @ Sonu (co-
accused) is selling heroin. Police formed a raiding party and went to the spot. At about 09:15 p.m. accused Subodh came there and the door of his room was knocked.
r The door was opened by accused Subodh and two more boys were found in the room, who disclosed their names as Akhil Bhardwaj (petitioner herein) and Sandeep Kumar (co-accused). After giving their search, the police started searching the room and it was duly videographed and photographed. Police found an electronic Weighing Machine, a spoon, currency notes of rupees ten, which were rolled, four insulin injections, four gas lighters and some white substances contained in a polythene packet. The said polythene packet was checked and it was found containing heroin (chitta), which, on weighment, was found to be 14.82 grams. Thereafter, the police completed all the codal formalities. Spot map was prepared and the statements of the witnesses were recorded. The petitioner and co-
accused were arrested. During the course of investigation the petitioner and co-accused Sandeep Kumar divulged that they are drug ::: Downloaded on - 29/09/2019 02:35:21 :::HCHP 3 addicts and accused Subodh used to supply them heroin. They further divulged that they paid rupees four thousand each to accused Subodh and he procured heroin from Delhi. Accused Subodh also divulged .
that the petitioner and co-accused Sandeep Kumar are drug addicts and they gave him rupees four thousand each for heroin. He has further disclosed that he purchased the heroin from some unknown Nigerian at Delhi. As police team, alongwith accused Subodh went to Delhi, but that Nigerian person could not be traced. Sample of contraband was sent to SFSL, Junga, for forensic analysis and it was found to be sample of Diacetyle morphine (Heroin). As per the police, challan stands presented in the Court. Lastly, it is prayed that the bail application of the petitioner be dismissed, as the petitioner was involved in a serious crime. There is possibility that in case, at this stage, if the petitioner is enlarged on bail, he may flee from justice and tamper with the prosecution evidence.
4. I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned Additional Advocate General for the State and gone through the record, including the police report, carefully.
5. The learned Counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has further argued that petitioner is behind the bars for considerable time.
As per the prosecution story, the petitioner is not the main accused and he was only a consumer of narcotics. He has further argued that ::: Downloaded on - 29/09/2019 02:35:21 :::HCHP 4 the petitioner is not drug peddler. In these circumstances, the petitioner may not be kept behind the bars for an unlimited period, especially when the contraband was recovered from the main accused, .
i.e., Subodh, who was selling the same. He has further argued that keeping in view the quantity of the recovered contraband, it will not be apt to keep the petitioner behind the bars for an unlimited period. The parents of the petitioner want to reform him, so the petitioner be enlarged on bail. Conversely, the learned Additional Advocate General has argued that the involvement of the petitioner was found in a serious offence and the petitioner was found with the main accused, who was dealing in sale and purchase of heroin (chitta). The main accused used to sell the heroin to the local people and 14.82 grams of heroin alongwith weighing scale etc. was recovered from the main accused and the petitioner and co-accused Sandeep Kumar were there with the main accused. So at this stage, in case the petitioner is enlarged on bail, he may tamper with the prosecution evidence and may also flee from justice. He has prayed that the bail application of the petitioner be dismissed.
6. In rebuttal the learned Counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner cannot be kept behind the bars for an unlimited period, especially when the investigation is complete, challan stands presented in the Court, so the application be allowed and the petitioner be enlarged on bail.
::: Downloaded on - 29/09/2019 02:35:21 :::HCHP 57. At this stage, considering the age of the petitioner, the fact that the petitioner is not the main accused, who was dealing in sale and purchase of the contraband, the petitioner is a consumer, he is .
resident of the place and neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice, the fact that the investigation in the case is complete and now the challan stands presented in the Court, considering the overall facts, which have come on record, and without discussing the same at this stage and also the fact that the petitioner cannot be kept behind the bars for an unlimited period, so this Court finds that the present is a fit case where the judicial discretion to admit the petitioner on bail is required to be exercised in his favour. Accordingly, the petition is allowed and it is ordered that the petitioner, who has been arrested by the police, in case FIR No. 129 of 2019, dated 06.06.2019, under Sections 21 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, registered in Police Station Solan, District Solan, H.P., shall be released on bail forthwith in this case, subject to his furnishing personal bond in the sum of `25,000/- (rupees twenty five thousand) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court. The bail is granted subject to the following conditions:
(i) That the petitioner will appear before the learned Trial Court/Police/authorities as and when required.::: Downloaded on - 29/09/2019 02:35:21 :::HCHP 6
(ii) That the petitioner will not leave India without prior permission of the Court.
(iii) That the petitioner 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 such facts to the Investigating Officer or Court.
8. In view of the above, the petition is disposed of.
Copy dasti.
(Chander Bhusan Barowalia)
26th August, 2019 Judge
(virender)
::: Downloaded on - 29/09/2019 02:35:21 :::HCHP