SANJEEV KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HIMAHCAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Bail petitioner, namely Sanjeev Kumar, who is behind the bars since 2.6.2021, 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.77 of 2021, dated 2.06.2021, registered at police Station, Sadar, District Solan, H.P. under Sections 21 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short 'Act').

(2.) Status report filed by the respondent-State on the basis of the investigation carried out by the Investigating agency, reveals that on 2.6.2021, police after having received secret information, intercepted vehicle bearing registration No.HP-92-0951 at Chambaghat being driven by present bail petitioner, Sanjeev Kumar and allegedly recovered 12.70 grams heroin from the dash board of the vehicle in question. At the time of aforesaid recovery, one person apart from present bail petitioner namely, Aman Prashar was also sitting in the jeep. Since both the occupants of the vehicle failed to render proper explanation qua the possession of aforesaid quantity of contraband, police after completion of the necessary codal formalities lodged the FIR, as detailed hereinabove, against them and since then they are behind the bars. Since challan stands filed in the competent court of law 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. Desh Raj Thakur, learned Additional Advocate General, while fairly admitting the factum with regard to filing of the challan in the competent court of law, contends that though nothing remains to be recovered from bail petitioner, but keeping in view the gravity of offence alleged to have been committed by him, he does not deserve any leniency. While referring to the status report, learned Additional Advocate General submits that since petitioner alongwith other co-accused Raman Prashar purchased intermediate quantity of contraband from some unknown person at Kalka, it cannot be said that he is not indulging in the illegal trade of narcotics. Lastly, learned Additional Advocate General submits that since bail petitioner is drug addict, there is every likelihood of his being indulged in the activities again in case he is ordered to be enlarged on bail and as such, his prayer for grant of bail may be rejected outrightly.