IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA .

Cr.MP(M) No. 2888 of 2023 Reserved on: 21.11.2023.

Date of Decision: 05.12.2023.

Jeet Ram ...Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradeshr ...Respondent Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rakesh Kainthla, Judge.

Whether approved for reporting?¹ No.

For the P etitioner : Mr. Vijay Kumar Arora, Advocate.

For the Respondent : Mr. Jitender Sharma, Additional Advocate General.

Rakesh Kainthla, Judge The petitioner has filed the present petition for seeking the grant of regular bail. It has been asserted that the petitioner was arrested by the police of Police Station, Dhalli on 24.10.2023, in FIR No. 205 of 2023, dated 22.10.2023 for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 21 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (in short

1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes.

‘ND&PS Act’), registered at Police Station, Dhalli, District Shimla, H.P. As per the police case, the petitioner had conspired with the co-accused, who was found in possession of 8.54 grams of heroin. The petitioner is innocent and he was falsely implicated. The investigation is complete and no recovery is to be effected from the petitioner. The petitioner has a large family to support. He would abide by all the terms and conditions, which may be imposeud by the Court. Hence, the present petition. 2. The petition was opposed by filing a status report, asserting that the police party was on patrolling duty. They found th at a vehicle bearing registration No. HP-62-B-0645 was parked on the right side. Sandeep Kumar was occupying the driver's seat. The police inquired about his name but he tried to run away. The police apprehended the driver and searched the vehicle in the presence of independent witnesses. The police recovered the electronic weighing machine and 8.54 grams of heroin. The police seized the heroin and arrested the driver. The driver revealed on inquiry that he had purchased the heroin from Honey for Jeet Ram, the present petitioner for ₹24,000/-. The petitioner revealed that he had purchased the heroin for his consumption. The petitioner Jeet Ram is in judicial custody. The other accused is yet to be arrested. As per the record, FIR No. 232/2019, dated 13.12.2019, and FIR No. 30/2022, dated 24.2.2022 under the ND&PS Act are registered against the petitioner. The challan is being prepared against the petitioner and other accused.

3. I have heard Mr. Vijay K. Arora, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Jitender Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General for the respondent-State.

4. Mr. Vijay K. Arora, learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he was falsely implicated. The presumption of innocence is available even at the stage of bail and the petitioner should not be detained unnecessarily in custody. The criminal antecedents are no bar to grant bail to the petitioner. Therefore, he prayed that the present petition be allowed and the petitioner be released on bail.

5. Mr Jitender Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General for the respondent-State submitted that the petitioner was involved in similar offences in the past. This shows that he can indulge in the commission of similar offences in case he is released on bail. Hence, he prayed that the present petition be dismissed.

6. I have given considerable thoHught to the rival submissions at the bar and have gone through the record carefully.

7. The parameters for g ranting bail were considered by the Hon’ble Supreme Courrt in Bhagwan Singh v. Dilip Kumar @ Deepu @ Depak, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1059, wherein it was observed as under:-

12. The grant of bail is a discretionary relief which necessarily means that such discretion would have to be hexercised in a judicious manner and not as a matter of course. The grant of bail is dependent upon contextual facts of the matter being dealt with by the Court and may vary from case to case. There cannot be any exhaustive parameters s