DEVENDER KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Bail petitioner namely Devender Kumar, who is behind bars since 15/1/2024, has approached this Court in the instant proceedings filed under Sec. 483 of Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita (hereinafter 'BNSS') for grant of regular bail in case FIR No.1 of 2024, dtd. 15/1/2024, under Ss. 21, 27 and 29 of ND&PS Act, registered at Police Station New Shimla, District Shimla, H.P. Respondent-State has filed the status report and ASI Tej Singh has come present with record.

(2.) Close scrutiny of record/status reported reveals that on 15/1/2024, police, after having received secret information that persons namely Kunal Sharma and Devender Kumar, who hail from Punjab indulge in illegal trade of narcotics, raided room No. 101 of Dusk and Down Hotel, near Khalini Chowk, Shimla, and allegedly recovered 22.04 grams of Chitta/Heroin in presence of independent witnesses. Since, no plausible explanation ever came to be rendered by the aforesaid persons, on record qua possession of aforesaid quantity of contraband, police after having completed necessary codal formalities, lodged FIR, detailed hereinabove, arrested both the accused Kunal Sharma and Devender Kumar on 15/1/2024. Co-accused Kunal Sharma already stands enlarged on bail vide order dtd. 4/6/2024 passed by learned Special Judge, under ND and PS Act (CBI Court) Shimla, whereas present petitioner is behind bars for more than ten months. 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 regular bail.

(3.) Mr. Peeyush Verma, learned Senior Counsel duly assisted by Mr. Lalit Kumar Sehgal and Mr. Subhash Verma, Advocates, argued that petitioner has been falsely implicated because contraband allegedly recovered in the case at hand was never recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner, rather from the room of a hotel and not in the presence of independent witnesses. Mr. Verma, further states that once co-accused already stands enlarged on bail, coupled with the fact that petitioner herein is in judicial custody and considerable time is likely to be consumed in conclusion of trial, he also deserves to be enlarged on bail. Mr. Verma, further states that since other co-accused Kunal Sharma is not making himself present in the trial, trial is being unnecessarily delayed, as a result thereof, petitioner is languish in jail without his being held guilty.