SANDEEP Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present petition has been filed seeking regular bail under Sec. 439 Crimial P.C. in case FIR No. 27/16, dated 24.3.2016 under Sections 20 and 29 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (herein after referred to as NDPS Act in short) registered at Police Station Parwanoo, District H.P.. The petitioner is in custody since 24.3.2016 for alleged recovery of 2.689 kilograms charas from his conscious possession in Room No. 101, in Hotel Paradise, Sector-3, Parwanoo at 11:43 A.M. on 24.3.2016.

(2.) Prosecution case in brief is that on 24.3.2016 at about 11:30 A.M. Inspector Minakshi, SHO, Police Station Parwanoo had received information on her mobile phone that a person, namely, Sandeep Kumar involved in business of narcotic drugs, is staying in room No. 101 of Hotel Paradise, Sector-3, Parwanoo. Informant had also given identity of the person along with further details of his wearing and tattoos on his hand. The information was reliable and therefore, reasons to believe were reduced into writing under Sec. 42(2) of NDPS Act. As there was possibility of disappearance of the accused as well the contraband during the process of obtaining search warrant on account of distance from the Court, therefore, information was sent to SDPO Parwanoo and in the meanwhile, SHO Meenakshi Shah along with Police party raided the hotel Paradise and before searching room No.101, she had associated Ankit Sharma, Hotel Service Boy and Arvind Jetily owner of the hotel by joining them in the raiding party.

(3.) On the basis of information, room No 101 was knocked and on opening of the door, four persons, consuming liquor were found there and the person having appearance and wearing in consonance with the information received, was also there, who on inquiry had disclosed his name and address as familiar to identity of petitioner. Other three persons, namely, Ravinder Kumar, Ajay Kumar and Ved Parkash were also present there. Personal search of these three persons were conducted after complying with Sec. 50 of the NDPS Act, but nothing incriminatory was found from their person.