IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
RANJAN SHARMA, J.
Jitender - Petitioner
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh - Respondent
Cr.MP(M) No. 2786 of 2024
Decided On : 10-01-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of bail petition context. (Para 2) |
| 2. details surrounding detention and recovery of contraband. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. arguments presented by the bail petitioner. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. state's position and evidence reviewed. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 5. legal provisions and criteria for bail assessment. (Para 9 , 10) |
| 6. supreme court's observations on bail standards. (Para 11 , 12) |
| 7. comments on personal liberties and trial delays. (Para 13 , 14) |
| 8. final bail order issued by the court. (Para 15 , 16) |
JUDGMENT :
Ranjan Sharma, J.
Bail petitioner, Jitender [being in custody 14.09.2023] has come up before this Court seeking regular bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure [hereinafter referred to as Cr.P.C] originating from F.I.R. No. 148 of 2023 dated 14.09.2023, under Section 15 and 29 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (referred to as the NDPS Act) registered with Police Station Majra, District Sirmour, (H.P.)
FACTUAL MATRIX
2. Case set up by Mr. Karun Negi, Learned Counsel for the bail petitioner [Jitender] is that on 14.09.2023 police party received an information at about 10.20 a.m that a White Creta Hundai Car bearing registration No. HR14P-9300 was carrying contraband. On receipt of information, Nakka was laid at about 11.15 a.m at NH-07 near HPCL Petrol Pump when the car HR14P-9300 being driven by accused Jitender was intercepted by the patrolling party and Poppy husk/Chura Post weighing 54.402 Kg was recovered from gunny bags in the car. Consequently, other codal formalities were completed and the bail petitioner Jitender [driver] alongwith other co-accused, namely, Vishal Sharma, Shambhu Lal and Sattu Joggi were arrested by police on14.09.2023.
2(i) In above backdrop, the case of the bail petitioner, Jitender, is that there is no iota of evidence against the petitioner. It is further averred that the bail petitioner has not committed any offence and he is not connected with the same and is not guilty in any manner. It is further averred that no contraband was recovered from the exclusive and conscious possession of the bail petitioner. It is further averred that the petitioner is facing incarceration since 14.09.2023 i.e.for last more than one year and four months now.
2(ii). It is further averred that the petitioner joined the Investigation and no recovery is pending from the bail petitioner. It is averred that pursuant to Investigation the Challan-Final Police Report has been presented before jurisdictional Court. Petitioner has furnished the undertaking that in case he is released on bail, the bail petitioner shall join the trial and shall not cause any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case and shall abide by such terms and conditions as may be imposed by this Court. It is averred that the bail petitioner had filed a bail application before Learned Special Judge-II, Sirmaur District at Nahan in CIS Case No. 3 of 2024, which was dismissed by Learned Special Judge on 08.04.2024 [Annexure P-3]. It is further averred that after dismissal of the bail application before Learned Special Judge bail petitioner [Jitender], had filed an application for regular bail i.e. Cr.MP(M) No. 396 of 2024 before this Court, which was withdrawn on 06.03.2024 [Annexure P-2]. After withdrawal of the petition, the bail petitioner filed the instant bail application. It is averred that bail petitioner is 31 years of age and he undertakes not to flee away from justice.
With these averments, the claim for bail has been preferred before this Court.
STAND OF STATE AUTHORITIES IN STATUS REPORT:
3. Pursuance to issuance of notice, the State Authorities have filed the Status Report dated 06.01.2025 on Instructions of SHO Police Station, Sirmaur [H.P].
3(i). Perusal of Status Report indicates the sequence of events that four accused, namely, Jitender [driver] [bail petitioner], Vishal Sharma, Shambhu Lal and Sattu Joggi were travelling in White Creta Hundai Car bearing registration No. HR14P
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
Deepak Yadav versus State of Uttar Pradesh
Narcotics Control Bureau vs Mohit Aggarwal
Union of India vs Ajay Kumar Singh @ Pappu
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....
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 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....
Prolonged pre-trial detention without a clear and prima facie case warrants bail under the NDPS Act, emphasizing the right to personal liberty.
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 detention without trial undermines personal liberty; bail is favored, especially when evidence against the accused is weak and trial delays are significant.
Prolonged incarceration and lack of evidence necessitate bail, emphasizing personal liberty and the right to a speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution.
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.
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.
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.