RAJ KUMAR Vs. UT OF J&K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) As per the prosecution case, on 24.05.2020, a team of police personnel of Police Station, Bari Brahmana apprehended the petitioner/accused, who was proceeding on a Motor Cycle No. JK02AM/8075 from Jammu towards Bari Brahamana. Upon his search, 500 gms of Charas was recovered and seized. Accordingly, on the basis of docket of the Naka party, FIR No. 109/2020 for offences under Section 8/20 of NDPS Act was registered with Police Station, Bari Brahmana. On culmination of the investigation, the petitioner was found involved in the commission of offence under Section 8/15 of NDPS Act. Challan against him has already been filed before the Court of Principal Sessions Judge, Samba.

(2.) It appears that the petitioner had filed an application for grant of bail in his favour in the aforesaid FIR before the Court of Principal Sessions Judge, Samba, and the same was rejected by the Court vide order dated 31.08.2020. Being aggrieved of the said order, the petitioner has filed the instant petition before this Court for grant of bail in his favour on the grounds that the contraband allegedly shown to be recovered from the possession of the petitioner is an intermediate quantity, as such, the rigor of Section 37 NDPS Act will not apply to the present case and that the present case is to be dealt with as per the relevant provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure; and that the petitioner is an innocent person having no connection with the offences with which he has been booked.

(3.) The respondent has resisted the bail petition by filing objections thereto. In its objections, the respondent besides reiterating the allegations contained in the charge sheet against the petitioner has contended that the offence committed by the petitioner/accused is serious, grave and heinous in nature and as such, he cannot claim bail as a matter of right; that the petitioner/accused is involved in possession of the narcotics which affects the society at large and causes adverse impact on health of the youth; that there is every apprehension that the petitioner/accused may tamper with the prosecution evidence and influence the witnesses in case of his release on the bail; that a wrong signal would go to the society if the petitioner/accused is admitted to bail in the present case; that the trial of the case is at its infancy and the statements of material witnesses are yet to be recorded; that the accused if granted bail at this stage, may not remain available to face the trial before the concerned Court.