BELI RAM Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Bail petitioner namely, Beli Ram, who is behind the bars since 4.12.2017, has approached this Court in the instant proceedings filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, praying therein for grant of regular bail in case FIR No.320 of 2017, dated 24.11.2017, under Sections 20 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act,1985( for short 'Act), Sections 181 and 196 of Motor Vehicles Act and Section 201 of IPC, registered at police Station, Sadar, District Mandi, Himachal Pradesh.

(2.) Status report filed in terms of order dated 23.11.2020 on behalf of the respondent-State, reveals that on 23.11.2017, police party laid Nakka near Sukibhai and stopped car bearing No.HP-34-B-6732 (Alto) for checking. Since conduct of the occupants of the vehicle, as referred above, was found to be suspicious, police after having associated two independent witnesses carried out the personal search of the occupants of the car as well as vehicle bearing No. HP-34-B-6732 (Alto) and allegedly revered 4kg. 285 grams charas from the penals of the front doors of the car. Since, no plausible explanation came to be rendered on record by the occupants of the car namely, Sunil Kumar, Ajay Kumar and Govind Ram, police after completion of the necessary codal formalities registered the aforesaid FIR against them and since then they are behind the bars. Allegedly, during investigation persons arrested on the date of alleged incident by the police revealed that they had purchased aforesaid quantity of contraband from the present bail petitioner i.e Beli Ram at village Bhalan for consideration of Rs. 2,00,0000/-. Though, initially persons named Beli Ram absconded, but on 4.12.2017 surrender before the police station concerned. As per the case of the prosecution, bail petitioner Beli Ram during the investigation admitted the factum with regard to sale and purchase of charas for consideration of Rs. 2, 00,000/-. Status report reveals that out of Rs. 2,00,000/- bail petitioner gave Rs. 70,000/- on 23.11.2017 to person namely, Bhimi Ram R/o village Kandi for purchasing two mules. As per the investigating agency, remaining amount of Rs.1,30,000/- was admitted to be spent by bail petitioner on the construction of his house. Since bail petitioner allegedly destroyed sim of the telephone/mobile used by him while talking to the principal accused, a case under section 201 of IPC alongwith Section 20 and 29 of NDPS Act, also came to be registered against him and since 4.12.2017, he is behind the bars.

(3.) For completion of facts, it may be noticed that prior to filing of the petition at hand, petitioner had earlier approached this Court by way of Cr.MP(M) No.757 of 2019, but the same was dismissed as withdrawn vide judgment dated 20th June, 2019, whereby this Court having taken note of the fact that bail petitioner is behind the bars since 4.12.2017, directed the learned Court below to conclude the trial expeditiously, preferably on or before 30.9.2019. However, fact remains that till date only five prosecution witnesses, out of 17 have been examined. Since five prosecution witnesses including independent witnesses associated by the prosecution to prove recovery of contraband have not supported the case of the prosecution during the trial, petitioner has approached this Court in the instant proceedings under the changed circumstances.