IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
RANJAN SHARMA, J.
Tilak Raj - Petitioner
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh - Respondent
Cr.MP(M) No. 1462 of 2024
Decided On : 10-01-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. bail application filed with claims of false allegations requires careful scrutiny. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. legal precedents underline that bail is a right, not a punishment. (Para 6 , 8 , 12) |
| 3. assessment of incarceration duration and absence of prima facie case affects bail decisions. (Para 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 4. court's order balances legal rights, societal needs, and mandates bail with conditions. (Para 24 , 25 , 26) |
JUDGMENT :
Ranjan Sharma, J.
Bail petitioner, Tilak Raj [being in custody19.05.2023] has approached this Court, under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 [hereinafter referred to as BNSS ] seeking regular bail originating from the FIR No. 98 of 2023 dated 19.05.2023, registered with Police Station Baijnath, District Kangra [H.P.], under Sections 20 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (referred to as the NDPS Act) and under Section181 of the MOTOR VEHICLES ACT .
FACTUAL MATRIX
2. Case set up by Mr. Vijender Katoch, Learned Counsel is that prosecution case is that on 18.5.2023 at around 09.45 p.m, while the Police Party headed by Inspector Gaurav Bhardwaj alongwith other Police Officials were on patrolling duty near GMS Kyori, a secret information was received that two persons were selling Charas near Jagarkot Ajay Pal Devta Temple. On receiving this information, Inspector Gaurav Bharadwaj and two Independent witnesses namely Pradhan Shiv Kumar and Up-Pradhan Rovan Lal reached village Sail and thereafter, IO Gaurav Bharadwaj in his private car left for Jagarkot Ajay Pal Devta Temple and the Independent witness also went to said temple spot in separate vehicle. On reaching Jagarkot Ajay Pal Devta Temple, at around 10.20 p.m, police party found one white Eon Car, without registration, occupied by three persons and one black pulsar motorcycle bearing No HP-33-7650 was found parked. On inquiry, the person sitting on driver seat disclosed his name Tilak Raj, the person sitting on co-driver seat revealed his name as Mehar Singh and person sitting on rear seat disclosed his name as Missu Ram. On checking of Eon Car, the police found one carry bag printed with green and red flowers from underneath the drivers seat and after untying bag, the police recovered sticks like black substance i.e. Charas-Cannabis and upon weighing it came out to be 1.509 Kgs. The recovered Charas was kept in same carry bag and was sealed with eight seals and documents of Car and Motorcycle were also seized and after completing all the codal formalities, the rukka was sent leading to registration of FIR.
2(i). The matter was Investigated and the Challan was presented before the jurisdictional Court. It is averred that the allegations were totally false and the bail petitioner [Tilak Raj], was not connected with the alleged offence. It was stated that the petitioner was falsely implicated. It is submitted that nothing is to be recovered from him and no fruitful purpose will be served by keeping him in judicial custody.
2(ii). Apart from this, the bail petitioner has given certain undertakings that he shall participate in the investigation and trial thereafter and shall not cause any inducement, threat or promise to any witness or person acquainted with the case and shall not tamper with the evidence in any manner. It is averred that in case of release, the bail petitioner shall abide by all other conditions which may be imposed by this Court.
2(iii). It is further averred that the bail petitioner earlier moved an application for bail before this Court [Cr.MP(M) No.729 of 2024], and on receipt of Status Report, the same was withdrawn by the bail petitioner on22.04.2024 [Annexure P-1].
2(iv). After withdrawal of the bail on 22.04.2024 Annexure P-1], the bail petitioner came across Forensic -Chemical Analysis Report and it is contented that entire contraband was not made homogenous as per Section 52 -A of NDPS Act and therefore the petitioner could not be presumed or implicated for commercial quantit
Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia versus State of Punjab
Ram Govind Upadhyay versus Sudarshan Singh
Kalyan Chandra Sarkar versus Rajesh Ranjan
Prasanta Kumar Sarkar versus Ashish Chatterjee
P. Chidambaram versus Directorate of Enforcement
Narcotics Control Bureau vs Mohit Aggarwal
Union of India vs Ajay Kumar Singh @ Pappu
State by the Inspector of Police vs B. Ramu
Manish Sisodia vs Directorate of Enforcement
Prolonged incarceration and lack of evidence necessitate bail, emphasizing personal liberty and the right to a speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution.
Prolonged pre-trial detention without a clear and prima facie case warrants bail under the NDPS Act, emphasizing the right to personal liberty.
Prolonged incarceration without trial violates the right to personal liberty under Article 21, necessitating the grant of bail even under stringent provisions like the NDPS Act if no reasonable groun....
Bail is granted when no prima facie case exists against the accused, emphasizing the right to personal liberty under Article 21, especially during prolonged incarceration and delay in trial.
Prolonged incarceration without trial infringes the fundamental right to personal liberty under Article 21, requiring bail to be granted in cases of no substantive evidence against the accused and ex....
Under prolonged detention circumstances, bail should be granted if no reasonable grounds exist to believe in the guilt of the accused, respecting Article 21 rights.
The court reinforced that bail serves to protect an individual's personal liberty, particularly when prolonged detention without trial raises constitutional concerns under Article 21, emphasizing the....
Prolonged incarceration without trial violates personal liberty; bail is granted when no reasonable grounds exist for guilt.
Prolonged pre-trial incarceration may justify bail under NDPS Act when there is no substantial evidence against the accused and the right to personal liberty under Article 21 is violated.
Prolonged detention without trial undermines personal liberty; bail is favored, especially when evidence against the accused is weak and trial delays are significant.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.