IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA ON THE 1st DAY OF JULY, 2022 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER BHUSAN BAROWALIA CRIMINAL MISC. PETITION (MAIN) No. 802 OF 2022 Between:-
PRABHAT SINGH S/O SH. WAKIL SINGH, R/O VPO LADORI, POLICE STATION AND TEHSIL NURPUR, DISTRICT KANGRA, H.P. (PRESENTLY LODGED IN JUDICIAL CUSTODY)
……PETITIONER (BY MR. ATUL KUMAR, ADVOCATE)
AND STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH.
……RESPONDENT (BY MR. SHIV PAL MANHANS ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE GENERAL MR. BHUPINDER THAKUR AND MR. YUDHVIR SINGH THAKUR, DEPUTY ADVOCATES GENERAL)
1 WHETHER APPROVED FOR REPORTING? Yes This petition coming on for orders this day, the Court passed the following:
O R D E R
The present bail application has been maintained by the petitioner under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure
seeking his release in case FIR No. 221 of 2021, dated 18.08.2021, under Sections 22 and 29 of the ND&PS Act, registered at Police Station Nurpur, District Kangra, H.P.
2. As per the averments made in the petition, the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He is neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice, as he is permanent resident of the place. No fruitful purpose will be served by keeping him behind the bars for an unlimited period, so he be released on bail.
3. Police report stands filed. As per the prosecution story, on 18.08.2021, Police party were on patrol duty for detection of offences under the Excise Act and the NDPS Act and was present at place Padki (Sadwan) near Shani dev Temple, on Sadwan-Suliali Road. At about 11:30 one person wearing red T- shirt, red lower and black slippers carrying one polythene packet was spotted coming from Sadwan side towards Shani Dev temple. On seeing the police party, the person turned back and started walking towards Sadwan side. On suspicion, police official asked him to stop, but he did not stop and threw a black polythene packet on the side of the road. Police apprehended the said person. On inquiry, he disclosed his name as Prabhat Singh @ Shipu (petitioner herein). Investigation Officer associated one Abhishek, as an independent witness and conducted search of the polythene packet thrown by the petitioner. When the said packet was opened, it was found containing 23 strips (each containing 24 capsules) of blue capsules of Mark SPM-PRX+Wockhardt and on counting capsules they were found 552 (i.e. 23x24) in total. The petitioner did not give satisfactory reply about the licence/permit and failed to produce any prescription slip. During investigation, petitioner disclosed that on 18.08.2021 his friend Rahul Dhiman informed him telephonically that in his vehicle bearing registration No. HP39C-3225, four boxes of Tramadole capsules have been kept and asked the present bail petitioner to come there and took the same. Consequently, FIR No. 221 of 2021, dated 18.08.2021, under Sections 22 and 29 of the ND&PS Act came to be registered against the petitioner. During interrogation, the petitioner disclosed that he and co-accused, Rahul Dhiman kept the capsules for self consumption. Lastly, it is prayed that the bail application of the petitioner be dismissed, as in case he is enlarged on bail, at this stage, he may tamper with the prosecution evidence and may also flee from justice. It is prayed that at this stage, the bail application of the petitioner be dismissed.
4. I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned Additional Advocate General for the State and gone through the records, including the police report, carefully.
5. The learned Counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has further argued that the petitioner is neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice, as he is permanent resident of the place. No fruitful purpose will be served by keeping the petitioner behind the bars for an unlimited period, Conversely, the learned Additional Advocate General has argued that the petitioner was found involved in a serious offence and considerable quantity was recovered from his possession, so in case the petitioner is enlarged on bail, at this stage, he may tamper with the prosecution evidence and may also flee from justice, It is prayed that the bail application of the petitioner be dismissed.
6. In rebuttal the learned Counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner is neither in a position to flee from justice, nor in a position to tamper with the prosecu