Himachal Pradesh High Court
Lakhvir Singh vs State Of Himachal Pradesh on 4 October, 2019
Author: Anoop Chitkara
Bench: Anoop Chitkara
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH,
SHIMLA
.
Cr.MP(M) No. 1814 of 2019
Date of Decision : 4.10.2019
Lakhvir Singh ...Petitioner.
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh ...Respondent.
Coram:
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Anoop Chitkara, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?1 No.
For the petitioner : Mr. Rajiv Rai, Advocate.
For the respondent : Mr. Nand Lal Thakur, Additional Advocate
General for the State.
Anoop Chitkara, Judge (oral)
For possessing 10 grams of Heroin, the petitioner, who is under arrest, on being arraigned as an accused in FIR No.58/2019, dated 8.8.2019, registered under Sections 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, (herein after referred as the "NDPS Act"), in the file of Police Station, Swarghat, District Bilaspur, H.P., disclosing non-bailable offences, has come up before this Court under Section 439 Cr.PC, seeking regular bail.
1Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
::: Downloaded on - 04/10/2019 20:32:03 :::HCHP 22. The status report filed. I have seen the status report(s) as well as the police file to the extent it was necessary for deciding .
the present petition, and the same stands returned to the police official. As per the status report, there are as many as six cases pending against the bail petitioner, three of which are under ND&PS Act, with intermediate quantity. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner has two daughters at home and prays that he be given last opportunity to reform himself. I have heard Sh. Rajiv Rai, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Nand Lal Thakur, learned Additional Advocate General for the respondent/State.
FACTS
3. The gist of the First Information Report and the investigation is as follows:
That on 8.8.2019 at about 6:25 p.m., when a police party of Police Station, Swarghat, District Bilaspur, H.P., was on patrolling duty at Panjpiri Mor (Jeoripattan) road, the accused was standing on the side of the road and on seeing the police party, he got perplexed and took something out from the right side pocket of his pant and threw it towards his backside and also tried to flee away towards Jeoripattan side, but after 30-35 steps, he was nabbed. An independent witness was associated. Then, the police took the transparent ::: Downloaded on - 04/10/2019 20:32:03 :::HCHP 3 polythene having a knot, allegedly thrown by the accused/petitioner, in which a brown coloured substance as .
Heroin, was found, which was weighed and found to be 10 grams. Thereafter, the other procedural formalities were completed and the aforesaid F.I.R. came to be registered.
REASONING
4. Keeping in view the quantity of contraband, I am of the considered view that the judicial custody of the petitioner is not going to serve any purpose whatsoever and I am inclined to grant him bail in the interim, on the following grounds:
(a) As per the FIR, the substance involved in, is Heroin, mentioned at Sr. No. 56 of the Notification, issued under Section 2(viia) and (xxiiia) of NDPS Act, specifying small and commercial quantities of drugs and psychotropic substances.
(b) The quantity of Heroin involved is 10 grams, which is less than Commercial Quantity but greater than Small Quantity. As such the rigors of Section 37 of NDPS Act shall not apply in the present case. Resultantly, the present case has to be treated like any other case of grant of bail in a penal offence.
(c) The petitioner is in judicial custody since 8.8.2019.
(d) The quantity of Heroin involved is 10 grams.::: Downloaded on - 04/10/2019 20:32:03 :::HCHP 4
(e) The petitioner is a permanent resident of the address mentioned in the memo of parties. Therefore, his presence .
can always be secured.
(f) I am satisfied that no purpose will be served if the bail petitioner remains in judicial custody.
(g) I am of the considered view that, prima facie, petitioner has made out a case for grant of interim bail.
5. In the interim, the petitioner shall be released on bail in the present case, in connection with the FIR mentioned above, on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.10,000/- with one surety in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judge/Sessions Judge, Bilaspur or learned Additional Sessions Judge at Ghumarwin, District Bilaspur, H.P.
6. This Court is granting this interim bail subject to the conditions mentioned herein. The petitioner undertakes to comply with all directions given in this order and the furnishing of bail bonds by the petitioner is acceptance of all such conditions:
a) This bail is only interim and it is subject to confirmation only if the accused joins investigation.
b) The accused shall appear before the Investigating Officer at 10:00 a.m., after the day, he is released from prison. Thereafter, he shall continue to join investigation, as and when directed by the I.O.::: Downloaded on - 04/10/2019 20:32:03 :::HCHP 5
c) The petitioner shall neither influence nor try to control the investigating officer, in any manner .
whatsoever.
d) The petitioner undertakes not to make any inducement threat or promise, directly or indirectly, to the investigating officer or any person acquainted with the facts of the case to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or any Police Officer or tamper with the evidence.
e) In case, the petitioner is arraigned as an accused of the commission of any offence, prescribing the sentence of imprisonment of more than three years and in case the bail petitioner is arraigned as an accused in any case, under the provisions of the NDPS Act, irrespective of the quantity, be it a small quantity, then within thirty days of knowledge of such FIR, the petitioner shall intimate the SHO of the present police station, with all the details of the present FIR as well as the new FIR. Resultantly, it shall be open for the State to apply to this Court, for cancellation of this bail, if it deems fit and proper.
f) If is further clarified that in case the petitioner again commits any offence mentioned in preceding paragraph, then the State shall be at liberty to file an application for cancellation of the bail, not only in this case, but also in other cases, under ND&PS Act, against the petitioner, as has been mentioned in the status report.
::: Downloaded on - 04/10/2019 20:32:03 :::HCHP 67. It is clarified that the present bail order is only with respect to the above mentioned FIR. It shall not be construed to be a .
blanket order of bail in all other cases, if any, registered against the petitioner.
8. 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. Petition stands allowed in the aforesaid terms.
9. List on 18.10.2019, on which date, fresh status report be filed. It is for the Additional Advocate General to decide whether the presence of Investigating Officer is required or not.
Copy dasti.
(Anoop Chitkara), Judge.
4th October, 2019 (KS) ::: Downloaded on - 04/10/2019 20:32:03 :::HCHP