AMARJEET SINGH Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Bail petitioner Amarjeet Singh, who is behind the bars since 16/10/2021 has approached this court by way of instant petition filed under S. 439 CrPC, for grant of regular bail in FIR No. 228 of 2021, dtd. 16/10/2021 registered at Police Station Ghumarwin, under S. 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act. Pursuant to order dtd. 25/7/2022 respondent-State has filed status report. Investigating Officer has come present with record. Record perused and returned.

(2.) Perusal of record/status report reveals that on 16/10/2021, police party present in Ghumarwin Bazaar, found conduct of one person i.e. bail petitioner suspicious as he, after seeing police tried to run away, deemed it necessary to cause his personal search. As per police said person, while running from spot, threw one polythene bag in the nearby drain and as such, they after having apprehended the bail petitioner, conducted his personal search as well as search of carry bag allegedly thrown by him in the drain and recovered 40.48 grams of Chitta/Charas. Since no plausible explanation came to be rendered on record by the bail petitioner qua possession of the aforesaid intermediate contraband, police after completion of necessary codal formalities, lodged FIR as detailed herein above, and since then the bail petitioner is behind the bars. Since Challan stands filed in the competent court of law, the bail petitioner has approached for grant of regular bail.

(3.) While fairly admitting factum with regard to filing of Challan in the competent court of law, Mr. Sudhir Bhatnagar, learned Additional Advocate General submits that though nothing remains to be recovered from bail petitioner but keeping in view gravity of offence alleged to have been committed by the bail petitioner, he does not deserve any leniency and his prayer for bail deserves outright rejection. While making this court peruse the record, learned Additional Advocate General submits that in the past, two cases already stand registered against the bail petitioner under the Act ibid, as such, there is reason to believe that he is not a drug addict but has become a drug peddler, as such, it may not be in the interests of justice to enlarge him on bail at this stage, because in the event of being enlarged, he may not only flee from justice but may also tamper with prosecution evidence.