Himachal Pradesh High Court
Of Shri Tek Ram vs Pallulabid Ahamad Arimutta And Another on 21 September, 2022
Author: Vivek Singh Thakur
Bench: Vivek Singh Thakur
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA.
ON THE 21st DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2022
.
BEFORE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIVEK SINGH THAKUR
CRIMINAL MISC. PETITION (MAIN) No.1373 OF 2022
Between:-
KALI DASS, AGED 41 YEARS, SON
OF SHRI TEK RAM, RESIDENT OF
VILLAGE JANA, PO ARCHANDI,
TEHSIL AND DISTRICT KULLU
HIMACHAL PRADESH
r ....PETITIONER
(BY SH. YASHVEER SINGH RATHORE, ADVOCATE)
AND
STATE OF H.P.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SHRI HEMANT VAID, ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE GENERAL)
Whether approved for reporting?
This petition coming on for orders this day, the Court passed the following:
ORDER
Petitioner, invoking Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, have approached this Court for grant of bail in case FIR No. 228 of 2020, dated 20.8.2020, registered under Section 20, 25 and 29 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act ( for short 'NDPS Act'), in Police Station Sadar Kullu, District Kullu, Himachal Pradesh.
::: Downloaded on - 21/09/2022 20:05:27 :::CIS 2
2. Status Report stands filed. Record was also made available.
.
3. As per status report, petitioner Kali Dass, owner-cum-driver of vehicle No. HP-34C-5687, while driving the car along with two passengers namely Budh Ram and Govind, was stopped by police on 19.8.2020 at 9 PM for checking. Budh Ram was sitting on front seat of car whereas Govind with a bag was sitting on rear seat. As per status report, occupants of vehicle were perplexed leading to suspicion of transportation of some illegal articles or narcotic drug. Whereupon, for non-availability of independent witnesses, police officials were associated in search and seizure process and vehicle was checked. Govind sitting on rear seat was hiding a rucksack bag in between his legs. On checking whereof, 1.596 Kg. charas was recovered. After following the procedure, charas was taken in possession and seized and by sending a Ruka to Police Station, FIR was register. Investigation was completed and all three occupants of vehicle were arrested for transporting the contraband. Since then, after remaining in police custody, petitioner is in judicial custody.
4. Prosecution case is that during investigation, Govind disclosed that he, along with Kali Dass and Budh Ram, was returning to Ramshilla with contraband, purchased by Budh Ram from someone in village Jana for a consideration of Rs. 2 lacs but ::: Downloaded on - 21/09/2022 20:05:27 :::CIS 3 on way, they were intercepted by police. On the basis of this disclosure all three persons were arrayed as accused and challan .
was presented against all of them in Court on 12.01.2021.
5. As per State FSL report, recovered contraband has been confirmed to be charas.
6. It has been submitted by learned counsel for petitioner that even if prosecution story is considered to be true as it is, then also, there is noting on record to connect petitioner Kali Dass with recovered contraband as charas as alleged, has been recovered from Govind who, after taking lift from petitioner Kali Dass, was travelling in car independently whereas petitioner Kali Dass, owner of vehicle, was driving the vehicle and Budh Ram had also taken lift in his car, who was sitting on front seat of vehicle. It has been further submitted that nothing has been recovered either from Kali Dass or from car but contraband has been recovered from rucksack bag of Govind, whereas petitioner was not knowing about transportation of contraband by Govind.
7. Learned counsel for petitioner has referred order dated 10.01.2022 passed by Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 242 of 2022, titled as State by (NCB) Bengaluru vs. Pallulabid Ahamad Arimutta and another, wherein taking note of earlier judgment passed by the Supreme Court in Tofan Singh vs. State of Tamil Nadu, (2021)4 SCC 1, Supreme Court has upheld ::: Downloaded on - 21/09/2022 20:05:27 :::CIS 4 grant of bail to the accused persons, who were arrayed as accused and arrested on the basis of disclosure statement of co-accused .
only, but without having any admissible evidence against them except the disclosure statement of co-accused and Call Detail Records(CDRs).
8. By referring the aforesaid judgment in Pallulabid Ahamad Aributta's case, it has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that in present case also petitioner Kali Dass has falsely been implicated, only on the basis of statement of co-accused and therefore, in view of pronouncement of the Supreme Court, he deserves to be enlarged on bail.
9. Learned counsel for petitioner has also submitted that petitioner is behind the bars since last more than two years, i.e. 19.8.2020, and there is no criminal history of petitioner about his involvement in criminal case, as evident from status report, much less any case involving an offence under NDPS Act and petitioner is not habitual offender and there is no possibility of his fleeing from justice being local resident of area and he is also ready to abide by any condition imposed by Court and to furnish bail bonds to the satisfaction of Court in case he is enlarged on bail.
10. Learned Additional Advocate General has opposed the grant of bail on the ground that petitioner has been found transporting 1.596 Kg. charas in the car as it has been recovered from Govind ::: Downloaded on - 21/09/2022 20:05:27 :::CIS 5 tranvelling in the same car and offence committed by petitioner is affecting not only the individual but also society at large and .
therefore, it has been pleaded that petitioner is not entitled for bail.
11. Considering the facts and circumstances narrated in prosecution story including recovery of contraband from rucksack bag, allegedly being in possession of co-accused Govind and r to period of detention as well as other material placed before me and also taking note of the factors and parameters, required to be considered at the time of adjudication of bail application, as propounded in various pronouncements of the Courts including the Supreme Court, I am of opinion that at this stage, without commenting upon the claims and counter-claims of prosecution and learned counsel for petitioner/accused petitioner can be enlarged on bail.
12. Accordingly, petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail, at this stage, subject to furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs. 1,50,000/-with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court within a period of two weeks from today and also subject to any further conditions to be imposed by trial Court for assuring his presence during trial including the following further conditions:-
(i) That the petitioner shall make himself available during the investigation as ::: Downloaded on - 21/09/2022 20:05:27 :::CIS 6 well as trial on each and every date as and when required;
.
(iii) 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/her from disclosing such facts to Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. He shall not, in any manner, try to overawe or influence or intimidate the prosecution witnesses;
(iv) That the petitioner shall not obstruct the smooth progress of the investigation as well as trial;
(v) That the petitioner shall not jump over the bail and shall inform, in writing, regarding change of address, land line number and/or mobile number, if any, in advance, to concerned Police Station;
(vi) That the petitioner shall not commit the offence similar to the offence to which he is accused or suspected or the commission of which he is suspected;
(vii) In the event of repetition of commission of offence, bail granted in present case shall be liable to be cancelled on taking appropriate steps by prosecution/police;
(viii) That the petitioner shall not leave India without prior permission of Court;::: Downloaded on - 21/09/2022 20:05:27 :::CIS 7
(ix) That petitioner shall not misuse his liberty in any manner.
.
19 It will be open to the prosecution to apply for imposing any such other or further condition on the petitioner as deemed necessary in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice. It will also be open to the trial Court/Magistrate to impose any other or further condition on the petitioner as it may deem necessary in the interest of justice. 20 In case the petitioner violates any condition imposed upon him, his bail shall be liable to be cancelled. In such eventuality, prosecution may approach the competent Court of law for cancellation of bail in accordance with law. 21 Learned trial Court is directed to comply with the directions issued by the High Court, vide communication No. HHC/VIG/Misc.Instructions/93-IV.7139 dated 18.3.2013. 22 Any observation made in this order shall not affect the merits of case in any manner and will strictly confine for the disposal of this bail application filed under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure 1973.
The petitioner is permitted to produce copy of order downloaded from the High Court website and the trial Court shall not insist for certified copy of the order, however, they may verify ::: Downloaded on - 21/09/2022 20:05:27 :::CIS 8 the order from the High Court website or otherwise.
Petition stands disposed of.
.
September21,2022 (Vivek Singh Thakur)
(ms) Judge
r to
::: Downloaded on - 21/09/2022 20:05:27 :::CIS