TOLU RAM Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since all the bail petitions arise out of same FIR, they were being heard together and are being disposed of vide this common order.

(2.) Sequel to orders dtd. 8/8/2022, whereby bail petitioners were ordered to be enlarged on bail, in the event of arrest in FIR No. 33, dtd. 31/3/2022, under S.18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act registered at Police Station Padhar, District Mandi, Himachal Pradesh, respondent-State has filed status report and the Investigating Officer has come present with record. Record perused and returned.

(3.) While fairly admitting the factum with regard to joining of investigation by bail petitioners in terms of order dtd. 8/8/2022, Mr. Sudhir Bhatnagar, learned Additional Advocate General submits that though nothing remains to be recovered from bail petitioners but keeping in view gravity of offence alleged to have been committed by the bail petitioners, they do not deserve leniency and their prayer for bail deserves outright rejection. Mr. Guleria further submits that it may not be in the interests of justice to enlarge the bail petitioners on bail, because in that event they may not only flee from justice but may also tamper with prosecution evidence.