ORDER :

Petitioner is accused in case registered vide F.I.R. No. 14 of 2021 dated 27.03.2021, registered at Police Station Sainj, District Kullu, Himachal Pradesh, under Sections 20, 25 and 29 of the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, “NDPS Act”).

2. Petitioner seeks bail under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure, in the above noted case, on the grounds that her implication is false. Nothing was recovered from her and she has been arrayed as an accused with the aid of Section 29 of NDPS Act. Her implication on the sole statement of co-accused Dabey Ram is not sustainable. Further, it has been stated that because of land dispute with the petitioner herein, Dabey Ram named her. There is no corroboration to the statement of Dabey Ram.

3. It has also been canvassed on behalf of the petitioner that she has no previous criminal history. She is permanent resident of ward No. 03, Tamhol office Raila, Sub-Tehsil Sainj, District Kullu, Himachal Pradesh. The investigation of the case is complete and there is no justification to prolong the custody of petitioner. There is no apprehension of petitioner fleeing from course of justice.

4. On notice, respondent has placed on record status report. The case of the respondent is that on 27.03.2021, police party headed by HC Anupam Kumar No.13 had laid “Nakka” at place Larji. At about 4:30 A.M. a vehicle bearing No. HP-24B-6994 (Tata Tigor) was stopped for checking. Immediately, another vehicle bearing No. HP24C-6968 (Pick-Up) followed and stopped behind the Tata Tigor car. Two persons occupying vehicle bearing No. HP-24B-6994 immediately alighted and ran towards river. Vehicle bearing No. HP-24C-6968 (Pick-Up) was occupied by its driver named Vinod Kumar. On search of said vehicle HP-24C-6968 “Charas” was recovered, which weighed 1KG and 555 grams. Vinod Kumar was arrested. As per his version, the recovered “Charas” belonged to Ram Krishan and Deep Ram @ Nittu, who were occupants of the car bearing No. HP-24B-6994.

5. Ram Krishan and Deep Ram @ Nittu were arrested on 30.03.2021. They disclosed that they had purchased the recovered contraband from Dabey Ram, who was also arrested on the same day. As per disclosure made by Dabey Ram, he had purchased the contraband from the bail petitioner on 26.03.2021. The bail petitioner was arrayed as accused and was arrested on 01.06.2021.

6. Bail petitioner had earlier preferred a petition under Section 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure being Cr.M.P(M) No. 840 of 2021, which was dismissed by a co-ordinate bench of this Court on 31.05.2021.

7. As per the case of the respondent, during investigation bail petitioner has denied having sold contraband to Dabey Ram. Petitioner had raised a plea that Dabey Ram had named her due to a land dispute inter-se them. All the accused namely, Vinod Kumar, Ram Krishan, Deep Ram @ Nittu and Dabey Ram and bail petitioner are in judicial custody. The challan has been presented in the Court and the matter is pending before learned Special Judge, Kullu.

8. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Additional Advocate General for the State.

9. It has been argued on behalf of bail petitioner that her implication on the sole statement of Dabey Ram, is not sustainable, especially, when there is no corroborative evidence against her. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted with vehemence that there has been no telephonic conversion between the bail petitioner and Dabey Ram. As per petitioner, the evidence collected by Investigating Agency only revealed exchange of telephone calls between her and Sarla Devi, wife of Dabey Ram and on the basis of alleged telephonic conversion between the bail petitioner and Sarla Devi, she cannot be said to be a privy to the crime.

10. It has also been submitted on behalf of petitioner that since no recovery was effected from petitioner, rigors of Section 37 of NDPS Act will not apply. Petitioner has no criminal history. Reliance has been plac