Himachal Pradesh High Court
Mohit Sharma vs State Of H.P on 11 January, 2023
Author: Satyen Vaidya
Bench: Satyen Vaidya
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Cr.MP(M) No. 2818 of 2022
Decided on : 11.1.2023.
.
Mohit Sharma ...Petitioner.
Versus
State of H.P. ...Respondent
Coram:
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Satyen Vaidya, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?1
For the petitioner : Ms. Chetna Thakur, Advocate.
For the respondent : Mr. Manoj Chauhan, Addl. A.G.
Satyen Vaidya, Judge (Oral):
The petitioner is an accused in case FIR No. 129 of 2022, under Sections 21 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, (for short "the Act"), registered at Police Station Barotiwala, District Solan, H.P.
2. Petitioner has prayed for grant of bail on the grounds that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case. Petitioner is stated to be 21 years old. It is contended that nothing was recovered from the personal search of the petitioner and there is nothing on record to suggest that the petitioner had control over the place from where the contraband 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
::: Downloaded on - 11/01/2023 20:33:41 :::CIS -2-was allegedly recovered. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that his prolonged custody will jeopardize his entire .
career. Another ground on which the bail has been solicited for petitioner is that he is a victim of drug abuse and had been under treatment at PGI, Chandigarh. He needs further treatment and for such purpose is required to be released on bail.
3. On notice, respondent has filed the status report. It is submitted that on 14.9.2022, a secret information was received that petitioner and his brother were indulging in sale of heroin to the customers at their house and they had concealed the contraband in a room under the stair case of their house. A raid was conducted. The petitioner and his brother were found on spot. A pouch was found near the place where both of them were sitting and on its search 8.38 grams of heroin was recovered. It is further submitted that the co-
accused i.e. brother of the petitioner stands already bailed out by the order passed by this Court. It is also alleged against the petitioner that he is already an accused in a case registered vide FIR No. 149 of 2021 under the NDPS Act. The investigation is complete and challan has been filed in the Court.
::: Downloaded on - 11/01/2023 20:33:41 :::CIS -3-4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the case file carefully.
.
5. The quantity of heroin recovered in this case is intermediate and hence the rigors of Section 37 of the Act will not be applicable. Petitioner has been involved in the offence of similar nature at earlier occasion also.
6. The quantity allegedly recovered from the possession of petitioner is indicative of the fact that the petitioner is a victim of drug abuse. During the course of hearing of the case today, the parents of petitioner were present in person. They verified the fact that petitioner has been victim of I.V. Drug Abuse. He was under treatment at Drugs and Rehabilitation Centre, PGI, Chandigarh, but he had relapsed. Both the parents of the petitioner expressed their intent to get the further treatment of the petitioner from the same institution and if need be by getting him admitted as an indoor patient.
7. The facts suggest that in all probabilities, the addiction of the petitioner for drug abuse has landed him up as carrier/paddler of drug. Undoubtly, the offence committed by petitioner is not serious, however, the contention raised by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner requires ::: Downloaded on - 11/01/2023 20:33:41 :::CIS -4- rehabilitation and medical care does not appear to be without substance.
.
8. Petitioner has already remained in custody in the instant case for more than three months. His further incarceration may not be in the interest of justice as no fruitful purpose will be served rather it may become an impediment in cure of the petitioner from the disease in which he has got entrapped. Even otherwise, pre-trial incarceration cannot be ordered as a matter of rule.
9. Petitioner is permanent resident of Village Bated, P.O. Barotiwala, Tehsil Baddi, District Solan, H.P. His parents have come forward to help the petitioner out in his recovery process. Petitioner, if allowed to remain in custody, may not get the same care and treatment and it may further worsen his problem.
10. In view of peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in case FIR No. 129 of 2022, under Sections 21 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, registered at Police Station Barotiwala, District Solan, H.P. on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial ::: Downloaded on - 11/01/2023 20:33:41 :::CIS -5- Court. This order shall, however, be subject to the following conditions: -
.
i) That the petitioner shall appear before learned trial Court on each and every date and shall not delay the trial.
ii) That the petitioner shall 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 from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;
iii) That breach of any of the bail condition by the petitioner shall entail cancellation of the bail.
iv) That the petitioner shall not leave India without prior permission of the Court.
11. Any observation made herein above shall not be taken as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case and the trial Court shall decide the matter uninfluenced by any observation made herein above.
(Satyen Vaidya)
11th January, 2023 Judge
(kck)
::: Downloaded on - 11/01/2023 20:33:41 :::CIS