Prashant Chauhan vs State Of Himachal Pradesh on 15 July, 2016

[Cites 2, Cited by 11]

Himachal Pradesh High Court

Prashant Chauhan vs State Of Himachal Pradesh on 15 July, 2016

Bench: Sanjay Karol

    IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH,
                      SHIMLA.
                                                      Cr.MP(M) No.817/2016
                                                      Decided on : July 15, 2016




                                                                                    .
    Prashant Chauhan                                                          ...Petitioner





                                            Versus
    State of Himachal Pradesh                                                 ...Respondent
    Coram:





    The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Judge.
    Whether approved for reporting? No            1




                                                       of
    For the Petitioner                 :       Mr. Ashwani Sharma-II, Advocate.
    For the Respondent :                       Mr. R.S. Verma, Additional Advocate
                                               General for State.

    Sanjay Karol, J. (oral)

rtASI Bhagat Ram, Police Station, West, District Shimla, Himachal Pradesh is present alongwith record.

Record perused and returned. Status report taken on record.

2. In relation to F.I.R. No.108/2016 dated 8.5.2016, registered at Police Station, West, District Shimla, H.P., under the provisions of Sections 22-61-85 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985, petitioner, Prashant Chauhan was arrested on 8.5.2016. He is in judicial custody since then. He seeks bail in relation to the said F.I.R.

Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 20:49:14 :::HCHP 2

3. On 7.5.2016, police intercepted Alto Car No.HP-62A-1775 driven by Shri Prashant Chauhan in which one Rupin Chauhan was also sitting. From the .

vehicle, police effected recovery of 16 bottles of Corex Cough Syrup. Allegedly the contraband substance is a psychotropic substance. It is not the prosecution case that the petitioner is carrier or part of the larger of network which is otherwise indulging in illicit trade of psychotropic substances within the State of Himachal Pradesh.

rt It is submitted that the petitioner is a student and he has been behind bars for more than 65 days.

4. Learned Additional Advocate General, under instructions, states that the investigation is complete and the petitioner has fully cooperated. Custodial interrogation of the petitioner is no longer required. It is further submitted that he alleged crime is the first of its nature and the petitioner does not have any criminal past.

5. The principle for grant of bail is now well settled. The normal rule is bail and not jail. But then, while granting bail, Court has to keep in mind the nature of ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 20:49:14 :::HCHP 3 accusations, nature of evidence in support thereof, severity of the punishment which conviction will entail, character of the accused, circumstances which are peculiar to the .

accused, reasonable possibility of securing the presence of the accused at the trial, reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being tampered with, the larger interests of the public/State and other similar considerations.

6. Apex Court in Prasanta Kumar Sarkar versus Ashis Chatterjee and another, (2010) 14 SCC 496, has laid down the following principles to be kept in mind, while deciding petition for bail:

rt

(i) whether there is any prima facie or reasonable ground to believe that the accused had committed the offence;

(ii) nature and gravity of the accusation;

(iii) severity of the punishment in the event of conviction;

(iv) danger of the accused absconding or fleeing, if released on bail;

(v) character, behaviour, means, position and standing of the accused;

(vi) likelihood of the offence being repeated;

(vii) reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being influenced; and

(viii) danger, of course, of justice being thwarted by grant of bail.

::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 20:49:14 :::HCHP 4

7. Having holistically considered the nature of offence and the relevant attending circumstances in favour of the petitioner-accused, and also in view of the law .

discussed, herein above, in my considered view, it is a fit case in which petitioner should and ought to be enlarged on bail.

8. As such, petitioner, Prashant Chauhan is ordered of to be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of `50,000/- (rupees fifty thousand) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned.

rt It is clarified that petitioner shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence, flee away from the jurisdiction of this Court, try to influence the witnesses or in any manner act and conduct herself so as to disentitle him from the discretionary power. Also, he shall always make himself available during trial. The Court is further directed to comply with the directions issued by the High Court, vide letter No.HHCVIG/ Misc. Instructions/93-IV-7139, dated 18.3.2013.

9. 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.

::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 20:49:14 :::HCHP 5

Application stands disposed of.

Copy dasti.

July 15, 2016 (KS) (Sanjay Karol), J.

of rt ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 20:49:14 :::HCHP

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Himachal Pradesh High Court