Himachal Pradesh High Court
Akshit Gupta vs State Of Himachal Pradesh on 10 February, 2023
Author: Sushil Kukreja
Bench: Sushil Kukreja
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr. MP (M) No. 295 of 2023 .
Decided on: 10.02.2023 ___________________________________________________________ Akshit Gupta ....Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh ....Respondent Coram The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sushil Kukreja, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?1
For the petitioner
r : Mr. Parv Sharma, Advocate.
For the respondent : Mr. Vishal Panwar, Addl. AG
with Mr. Rajat Chauhan, Law
Officer.
Sushil Kukreja, Vacation Judge
By way of instant petition, filed under Section 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code, the petitioner is seeking bail in case F.I.R. No. 24/2023, dated 31.01.2023, registered at Police Station West, District Shimla, H.P., under Sections 21 & 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (hereinafter referred to as "NDPS Act").
1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes.
::: Downloaded on - 10/02/2023 20:31:18 :::CIS 22. The prosecution story, in brief, is that on .
31.01.2023 a rukka was received at Police Station West (Boileauganj) and it was informed that on 30.01.2023, the police party was on routine patrolling duty at police barrier Shoghi. Around 8:45 p.m., a CTU bus, bearing registration No. CH01GA7357 came from Solan side, which was signaled to stop. Thereafter, the police party started checking the bags of the occupants of the bus and when they proceeded to check the bags of the persons sitting on seats Nos. 34 & 36(W), they saw that the person sitting on seat No. 36 was carrying a gray and black coloured bag.
The police asked general questions from them regarding the reason for their travel, however, they could not give any satisfactory answer. On suspicion, the police party associated copassengers Vikram, Aryan Singh Rana, Driver of the bus Ved Pal and conductor of the bus Pushpender as independent witnesses in the proceedings, in whose presence, name of the person sitting on seat No. 34 was asked and he disclosed his name as Akshit Gupta (petitioner herein), whereas, the person sitting on seat No. ::: Downloaded on - 10/02/2023 20:31:18 :::CIS 3 36(W) disclosed his name as Ashit Sharma. On inquiry, the .
petitioner produced a joint ticket purchased by him and co accused for travelling to Shimla. On checking the bag being carried by Ashit Sharma, one plastic envelope packet with double tape was recovered, which was containing three transparent plastic envelopes, in which, light yellow coloured solid substance and powder was found, which was chitta/heroin. On weighment, the contraband was found to be 10.78 grams. Thereafter, the police completed all the codal formalities and FIR as detailed hereinabove was registered against the petitioner and coaccused.
Consequently, they were arrested on 31.01.2023.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He has further contended that investigation in this case is almost complete and nothing remains to be recovered at the instance of the petitioner and as such, the petitioner, who is only 20 years old boy and is in custody since his arrest, is required to be released on bail.
::: Downloaded on - 10/02/2023 20:31:18 :::CIS 44. Per contra, the learned Additional Advocate .
General opposed the bail application on the ground that keeping in view the gravity of the offence alleged to have been committed by the petitioner, he is not entitled to be enlarged on bail.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Additional Advocate General and have also gone through the record of the case and I am of the firm opinion that the petitioner has made out a case for grant of bail, as a perusal of the record indicates that the quantity of chitta/heroin, which is involved in the present case is an intermediate quantity. Therefore, rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act are not applicable in the present case. The petitioner was arrested on 31.01.2023 and since then he is behind the bars. There is no evidence on record to suggest that the petitioner will tamper with the prosecution evidence or will flee from justice, if released on bail. Moreover, the investigation is almost complete and the trial may take sufficiently long time to conclude. Therefore, no fruitful purpose will be served if the petitioner, who is ::: Downloaded on - 10/02/2023 20:31:18 :::CIS 5 only 20 years of age, is kept behind the bars for an .
unlimited period.
6. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case and since the quantity of chitta/heroin involved in this case is an intermediate quantity, this Court finds that the present is a fit case where judicial discretion to admit the petitioner on bail is required to be exercised in his favour. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed and it is ordered that the petitioner, who has been arrested by the police, in case F.I.R. No. 24/2023, dated 31.01.2023, registered at Police Station West, District Shimla, H.P., under Sections 21 & 29 of NDPS Act, shall be forthwith released on bail, subject to his furnishing personal bond to the tune of Rs. 50,000/ (Rupees fifty thousands), with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned Trial Court. This bail order is subject, however, to the following conditions:
(i) that the petitioner will appear before the Court and the Investigating Officer whenever required ;
(ii) that he 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 any facts to the Court or the police;
::: Downloaded on - 10/02/2023 20:31:18 :::CIS 6(iii) that he will not tamper with the prosecution evidence nor he will try to win over the Prosecution witnesses or .
terrorise them in any manner;
(iv) that he will not repeat the offence, as is alleged to have been committed by him.
(v) that he will not deliberately and intentionally act in a manner which may tend to delay the investigation or the trial of the case.
(vi) that he will not leave India without prior permission of the Court.
7. Needless to say that the Investigating agency shall be at liberty to move this Court for cancellation of the bail, if any of the aforesaid conditions is violated by the petitioner.
8. Be it stated that any expression of opinion given in this order does not mean an expression of opinion on the merits of the case and the trial Court will not be influenced by any observations made therein.
(Sushil Kukreja)
February 10, 2023 Vacation Judge
(raman)
::: Downloaded on - 10/02/2023 20:31:18 :::CIS