ASHWANI KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Bail petitioner namely, Ashwani Kumar, who is behind the bars since 8.12.2018, 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. 324/2018 dated 8.12.2018, under Sections 20, 22 61 ­85 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Act,1985 ( For short ' Act'), registered at police Station, Haroli, District Una, Himachal Pradesh.

(2.) Sequel to order dated 3.6.2020, respondent/State has filed the status report prepared on the basis of the investigation carried out by the Investigating Agency. Careful perusal of the status report reveals that on 8.12.2018, police party on suspicion stopped the present bail petitioner and took his personal search in the presence of independent witnesses. In the aforesaid search, police allegedly recovered 15 strips of Lomotil tablets (840 tablets of prohibited drugs) Since, the bail petitioner was unable to produce bill/licence qua the aforesaid huge quantity of prohibited drugs, police after completion of necessary codal formalities, lodged a FIR, detailed herein above, against him and since then he is behind the bars.

(3.) Mr. Sudhir Bhatnagar, learned Additional Advocate General while fairly admitting the factum with regard to pendency of the trial before the learned court below, contends that though material prosecution witnesses have been examined, but keeping in view the gravity of the offence alleged to have been committed by bail petitioner, he does not deserve any leniency. Mr. Bhatnagar, further contends that bail petition having been filed by the bail petitioner before the learned Court below stands rejected on 7.12.2019 and in the present case no changed circumstances, if any, has been indicated and as such, present petition deserves dismissal being not maintainable. While referring to the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Criminal Appeal No.722 of 2017, titled as Hira Singh and another versus Union of India and another, decided on 22.4.2020, Mr. Bhatnagar, submits that since entire bulk is to be taken into consideration while determining the quantity of drug allegedly recovered from the bail petitioner, judgment passed by this Court in Cr.MP(M) No.792 of 2017 titled as Surjeet Kumar versus State of H.P., decided on 17.7.2017, has no application in the present case. Lastly, Mr. Bhatnagar, contends that since quantity involved in the case is commercial in nature, rigours of Section 37 are attracted and as such, bail petitioner is not entitled to be released on bail during the pendency of the trial before the learned court below.