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.68 of 2022, dated 22.5.2022, under Sections 21, 25, 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, registered at Police Station Dhalli, District Shimla, 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 permanent resident of the place and neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice. No fruitful purpose will be served by keeping him behind the bars for an unlimited period, so he be released on bail.

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

3. Police report stands filed. Succinctly, the prosecution story, as emanates from the records that on 22.5.2022, around 5:45 p.m. a police team was on routine patrolling duty near Bhattakufar, where they received a secret tip-off that one vehicle bearing registration No.HP-06B-3680 (Grand i10) of white colour in which two boys, namely, Lokender Singh (petitioner herein) and Abhishek Mehta were going from Shimla towards Rampur side having heroine and if their vehicle is checked then, heroine/chitta can be recovered from them. Acting upon the secret tip-off, police associated independent witnesses and reached at the spot, where the petitioner and Abhishek Mehta were present. Thereafter, the personal search of the petitioner and Abhishek Metha was searched and found that one plastic white envelope was recovered, which contained some substance, which, on being examined through Drug Detection Kit, was found to be heroin, weighing 16.22 grams. Thereafter, all the codal formalities were completed. Police prepared the spot map and arrested the petitioner. Lastly, it is prayed that the instant bail application may be dismissed, as the petitioner has committed a serious offence and in case, at this stage, he is enlarged on bail, he may tamper with the prosecution evidence and may also flee from justice, so it is prayed that the instant bail petition may 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. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner is permanent resident of the place and neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice. He has argued that no fruitful purpose will be served by sending him behind the bars for an unlimited period, so the custody of the petitioner is not at all required by the police for any purpose. It has been argued that the petitioner cannot be kept behind the bars for an unlimited period, so the petitioner may be enlarged on bail by allowing the instant bail petition.

6. On the other hand, learned Additional Advocate General has argued that the petitioner has committed a serious crime and in case, at this stage, he is enlarged on bail, he may tamper with the prosecution evidence and may also flee from justice, so it is prayed that the bail application of the petitioner may be dismissed.

7. In rebuttal, the learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner is permanent resident of the place, neither in a position to flee from justice nor in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence. Investigation is complete, so the custody of the petitioner is not at all required by the police for any purpose. It has been argued that the petitioner cannot be kept behind the bars for an unlimited period, so the petitioner may be enlarged on bail by allowing the instant petition.

8. At this stage, considering the facts that the petitioner is permanent resident of the place, neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice, the investigation is complete, so th