Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
Satyen Vaidya, J.
Vidya Sagar - Appellant
Versus
State Of H P - Respondent
Cr M P (M) No. 1274 of 2021
Decided On : 30-07-2021
BAIL - Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act - Section 20 - 52A - 37 - The court discussed the provisions of Section 20, 52A, and 37 of the NDPS Act. It highlighted the importance of the weight of contraband in determining commercial quantity and the relevance of criminal history in bail decisions.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought bail in a case under Section 20 of the NDPS Act, claiming innocence and disputing the quantity of contraband. The respondent submitted a status report detailing the petitioner's apprehension with 1 kg 20 grams of charas and his involvement in another case with 480 grams of charas.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the weight of the contraband, as certified by the JMIC, indicated a commercial quantity, and the petitioner's criminal history disentitled him from bail. It emphasized the seriousness of drug offenses and the likelihood of the petitioner repeating the offense if released on bail.
Issues: The issues revolved around the weight of contraband, the petitioner's criminal history, and the applicability of Section 37 of the NDPS Act in determining bail eligibility.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the interpretation of the weight of contraband, the relevance of the petitioner's criminal history, and the serious nature of drug offenses in society.
Final Decision: The bail petition was dismissed, and the trial court was directed to decide the matter uninfluenced by the court's observations.
JUDGMENT
Satyen Vaidya, J. - Petitioner has sought his release on bail in case registered vide FIR No. 50 of 2021 dated 10th March, 2021 at Police Station, Jogindernagar, District Mandi, H.P under Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act ( in short 'the NDPS Act')
2. Petition has been filed on the ground that the petitioner is a law abiding citizen and has no art and part in the commission of any offence. He has been falsely involved in the case. The quantity of alleged contraband recovered in the case is doubtful. There is no compliance of mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act.
3. It has further been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that he is permanent resident of village Chhuchhal, Post Office Ropa, Tehsil Padhar, District Mandi, H.P. and there is no likelihood of petitioner fleeing from the course of justice. Petitioner has undertaken that in case of his release on bail, he will abide by all the conditions imposed by the Court.
4. On notice, the respondent has submitted the status report. Its perusal reveals that the petitioner was apprehended with 1 kg 20 grams of charas on 10.03.2021 at place Kadhaar by the police party. The recovery was effected in presence of independent witnesses named Yashodha Devi wife of Hemant Ram and Piar Singh son of Katku. The investigation was carried and petitioner was arrested. He was remanded to police custody till 12th March, 2021, on which day, he was ordered to be kept in judicial custody. On 12.03.2021, the certification of the inventory, as per Section 52A of the NDPS Act was done by learned JMIC, Jogindernagar.
5. The respondent, in the status report, has also submitted that the petitioner is an accused in another case registered vide FIR No. 65/2020 dated 28.02.2020, registered at Police Station, Sadar, District Mandi, H.P. under Section 20 NDPS Act and trial in the said case was pending.
6. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Additional Advocate General and have gone through the status report as well as the report under Section 173 Cr.P.C., placed on record by the petitioner along-with documents annexed therewith.
7. At the out set, learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of the Court to the report of State Forensic Science Laboratory, Junga, in which the weight of the contraband after deducting the weight of carry bags and parcel cloth is mentioned as 0.990 Kgs. On the strength of the said report, it has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that since the intermediate quantity of contraband is involved in the case in hand, therefore, the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act are not applicable.
8. No doubt, the report of State Forensic Science Laboratory, relied upon by the petitioner mentions the weight of contraband as 0.990 kgs., but it is revealed from the report under Section 173 Cr.P.C submitted by the police that during investigation certification of the inventory and photographs of contraband was got done from learned JMIC, Jogindernagar and as per said certification, contraband weighs 1 Kg 20 grams
9. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the probably the weight of the contraband at the time of certification included the weight of parcel cloth and the carry bags and hence the contraband cannot be said to be of commercial quantity. Order passed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court on 12.05.2020 in Cr.M.P(M) No. 603 of 2020 titled as Gokul Chand vs. State of H.P. has been relied upon by the petitioner in which also, the cannabis after deducting the weight of wrappers, poly bags etc. was found to be 0.989 Kgs. and the Court had proceeded to grant the bail.
10. It has also been contended on behalf of the petitioner that though he is an accused in an earlier case registered vide FIR No. 65/2020 dated 28th February, 2020 at Police Station, Sadar, District Mandi, H.P. with the allegations of having been apprehended with 480 grams of charas, but the said fact cannot be taken to be a deterrent in gra
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
