REPORTABLE/NON-REPORTABLE IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA ON THE 4^TH DAY OF APRIL 2022 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SATYEN VAIDYA CRIMINAL MISC. PETITION (MAIN) No. 208 OF 2022 DALIP SINGH SON (AGED 42 YEAR S) OF SH. HARI RAM RESIDENT OF VILLAGE PATTA, POST OFFICE KALLAR, TEHSIL SADAR, DISTRICT BILASPUR, H.P.

…...PETITIONER (BY SH. TARA SINGH CHAUHAN, ADVOCATE)

AND STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH …..RESPONDENT (BY MR. P.K. BHATTI AND MR. BHARAT BHUSHAN, ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE GENDERAL)

RESERVED ON : 1^ST APRIL,2022.

DECIDED ON: 4^TH APRIL, 2022. This petition coming on for orders this day, the Court passed the following:

ORDER

Petitioner is accused in case FIR No.98 of 2021, dated 1^st June, 2021, under Sections 18, 25 and 29 of the the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short ‘NDPS Act’), registered at Police Station Sadar, District Bilaspur, H.P. Petitioner was arrested in the above noted case on 1^st June, 2021, and is in custody since then.

2. On 1.06.2021, the police on prior information, intercepted truck No. HP-69-5452 on NH-205 at place near Kalar in District Bilaspur. Petitioner was on driving seat and another person named Jitender Sinfgh was found travelling in the truck. A gunny bag was found in the tool box of the truck. On opening of said gunny bag, it was found filled with rice, but on further intensive search opium weighing 5.025 kg. was recovered. Case under Sections 18, 25 and 29of the NDPS Act was registered against the petitioner. Besides petitioner, Jitender Singh, Bhimvali and Akshay Sahni have been arrayed as accused. While Jitender Singh and Bhimvali, besides the petitioner are in custody. Akshay Sahni is absconding and proceeding under Section 82 of the Cr.P.C., have been initiated against him.

3. The Investigation in the case has been completed and challan has been filed in the Court of learned Special Judge, Bilaspur.

4. Petitioner has approached this Court for grant of bail, in the above noted case on the ground that his implication is false. Contraband was not found from conscious possession of petitioner. He was merely the driver of the truck. As per petitioner, no legal evidence could be collected against him to connect him with the crime. It is further contended on behalf of the petitioner that there is no likelihood of his absconding from the course of justice as he is the permanent resident of Statef of Himachal Pradesh. Nothing is required to be recovered from petitioner. Petitioner has undertaken not to tamper with the prosecution evidence. It is further stated that the petitioner will abide by all the conditions as may be imposed.

5. In response, status report has been filed. It is stated that sufficient evidence has been collected against the petitioner. Petitioner was using multiple mobile numbers, i.e. 86298-48409, 94182-54381, 70181-65596 and 98820- 04692. From track of these mobile numbers, the location of their user was found in the States of Bihar and Utter Pradesh etc., within 4-5 days preceding the recovery of contraband. The bail application has been opposed on the ground that the petitioner is accused of a serious offence. Commercial quantity of opium has been found from his conscious possession.

6. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Advocate General for the respondent and have gone through the record produced by SHO Bhupinder Thakur, P.S. Sadar, Bilaspur.

7. Petitioner being driver o f the truck was its incharge at the time of his apporehension with the contraband. The owner of the truck was not occupying the vehicle. The presence of other passenger Jitender Singh in the truck is unexplained. The recovered opium was found concealed in rice containeod in a gunny bag and the gunny bag was found conceaCled in the tool box.

8. Though, this Court, while deciding the bail application will not venture into minute scanning of the evidence collected by the police, yet the same can be looked into for prima facie appraisal of seriousness of