AUGUSTINE CHIBUCIKE Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of present bail petition filed under Section 439 Cr.PC, prayer has been made on behalf of the bail petitioner namely Augustine Chibucike, for grant of regular bail in FIR No. 99/18 dated 7.8.2018, under Sections 21 and 29 of the ND&PS Act, registered at Police Station Dharampur, District Solan, Himachal Pradesh. Respondent State has filed the Status report in terms of order dated 8.3.2021. ASI Manohar Singh, I.O. P.S. Dharampur, District Solan H.P., is also present with records. Records perused and returned.

(2.) Record/Status report reveals that on 7.8.2018, police party present near Railway crossing at Sanwara, District Solan, H.P, stopped car bearing registration No. HP-63-4619, for checking. Since driver and other occupants of the car got perplexed after having seen police, police in the presence of the independent witnesses conducted personal search of the occupants as well as of the car and allegedly recovered 17 grams of heroin/chitta from the dashboard of the vehicle. Since occupants of the vehicle were unable to render proper explanation qua the possession of the contraband as referred above, police after completion of necessary codal formalities lodged FIR as detailed herein above. During investigation occupants of the car disclosed to the police that they have purchased the aforesaid quantity of the contraband from Dwarka, Delhi, from person namely Yunis Khan and present bail petitioner Augustine. On the basis of the aforesaid information furnished by the co-accused i.e. Pankaj, investigating agency visited Delhi and served the bail petitioner as well as other co-accused Yunis Khan with notice under Section 160 Cr.PC, asking therein the above named persons to remain present at concerned Police Station. Pursuant to aforesaid notice given by the police, both the accused visited police station on 11.8.2018. Police on the basis of information furnished by the bail petitioner and Yunis Khan raided the house/quarter of the present bail petitioner at Dwarka Delhi and allegedly, recovered 19.90 grams of Heroin/Chitta. Since 11.8.2018, present bail petitioner is behind bars, whereas another co-accused Yunis Khan stands already enlarged on bail. Challan stands filed in the competent court of law and nothing remains to be recovered from the bail petitioner. Since bail petitioner is behind the bars for more than two years, and prosecution evidence is yet to commence, bail petitioner has approached this Court in the instant proceedings under the changed circumstances.

(3.) Mr. Kunal Thakur, learned Deputy Advocate General, while fairly admitting factum with regard to filing of challan in the competent court of law contends that keeping in view the gravity of offence alleged to have been committed by the bail petitioner, he does not deserve any leniency and as such, prayer made for grant of bail deserves to be rejected outrightly. Learned Deputy Advocate General submits that present bail petitioner is a drug paddler and has been supplying the narcotics to young generation of the State and as such, it would be not in the interest of justice to enlarge him on bail. Lastly, learned Deputy Advocate General contends that in the event of petitioners being enlarged of bail, he may not only flee from justice', but may also indulge in such like activities again and as such, his prayer for grant of bail may not be accepted.