SAURABH THAKUR Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Bail petitioner, namely Saurabh Thakur, who is behind the bars since 7/7/2021, has approached this Court in the instant proceedings filed under Sec. 439 Cr.PC, for grant of regular bail in FIR No. 55/2021, dtd. 7/7/2021, under Ss. 21 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (in short "the Act") registered at Police Station Parwanoo, District Solan, H.P.

(2.) Status report filed by the respondent-State, in terms of order dtd. 11/8/2021, reveals that on 7/7/2021, police after having received secret information that two persons, namely, Manjit and Saurabh Thakur, travelling in Bus bearing No.HP-10A-9599, coming from Delhi to Rohru, may be possessing Chitta/Heroin, stopped aforesaid Bus at Timber Trail Chowk Parwanoo and allegedly recovered 32.58 grams of Chitta/Heroin from blue coloured T-Shirt being carried by co-accused Manjit in his hands. Since, bail petitioner Saurabh Thakur as well as other person namely Manjit, were unable to render proper explanation qua the possession of aforesaid intermediate quantity of Chitta/Heroin, police after completion of necessary codal formalities, lodged FIR detailed hereinabove against them and since then, both are behind the bars. Since, investigation in this case is complete and nothing remains to be recovered from the bail petitioner, he has approached this Court in the instant proceedings for grant of bail.

(3.) Mr. Sudhir Bhatnagar, learned Additional Advocate General, while fairly admitting factum with regard to completion of investigation, contends that though nothing remains to be recovered from the bail petitioner, but keeping in view the gravity of offence alleged to have been committed by him, he does not deserve any leniency and as such, prayer having been made on his behalf for grant of bail may be rejected. Mr. Bhatnagar, further contends that though intermediate quantity of Chitta/Heroin came to be recovered from the T- Shirt being carried by co-accused Manjit, but since, both the accused had gone together to Delhi to buy aforesaid quantity of contraband, it cannot be concluded, at this stage, that petitioner has been falsely implicated and as such, his application for grant of bail may be rejected.