MANOJ KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of instant petition, filed under Sec. 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code, the petitioner is seeking bail in case FIR No. 103/2022, dtd. 4/5/2022, Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the registered at Police Station Sadar, District Mandi, H.P., under Ss. 20 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (hereinafter referred to as "NDPS Act").

(2.) The prosecution story, in brief, is that on 4. 05.2022, police party had laid a nakka at place Mandi Kamand road near Cow Sadan for checking the vehicles. Around 4:05 p.m., a white coloured Scooty came from the Kamand side, which was signaled to stop. The rider of the Scooty stopped the Scooty at a distance of about 20 meters before the nakka laid by the police and ran backwards. There was also a pillion rider on the Scooty, who on seeing the police party got off the Scooty and starting running backwards, however, at a distance of 10 meters, he was nabbed by the police, whereas, the rider of the Scooty managed to escape. On asking, he disclosed his name as Brikam Chand. He also disclosed that the Scooty was of his friend Manoj Kumar (petitioner herein). The pillion rider was time and again looking towards Scooty and there was a bag in the Scooty, as such, the police got suspicious that there were some illegal and stolen articles in the bag. Police thereafter associated independent witnesses, namely Anshu Thakur and Naveen Kumar, in whose presence, the bag was checked, in which, black polythene packet was found. When knot of the said polythene packet was opened, a black coloured substance in the shape of sticks was found, which was charas/cannabis. On weighment, the same was found to be 1 kg 206 gms. Thereafter, the police completed all the codal formalities and consequently, FIR as detailed hereinabove was registered against the accused persons. The co accused (Brikam Chand) was arrested on 5/5/2022, whereas the petitioner was arrested after four months.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case, as no recovery was effected from him. He further contended that the petitioner is in judicial custody for the last more than six months and taking into consideration the age of petitioner, who is 23 years, if he is not enlarged on bail, his entire career will be ruined. He has further contended that investigation is complete and custody of the petitioner is not at all required and, as such, no fruitful purpose will be served by keeping him behind the bars for an unlimited period.