Vivek Singh Thakur, J
1. This petition has been preferred under Section 439 Cr.P.C. seeking grant of regular bail to the petitioner, in case FIR No.79 of 2020 dated
20.06.2020, registered in Police Station Dharampur, District Solan H.P., under Sections 417, 420, 342, 343 and 344 of the Indian Penal Code
(hereinafter referred to as ‘IPC’ in short).
2. Status reports filed on behalf of the respondent-State are on record.
3. As per prosecution case, a secret information, through a reliable informer, was received at 1.00 p.m. at Kumarhatti that in Village Rinhu Seri, one
person namely Jatin Nagar (petitioner) was running a Drug De-addiction Centre, without permission, in the name of ‘Maya Foundation’ and on
the pretext of de-addicting the addicts, by cheating, deceiving and misguiding persons, was extorting money from public and under the garb of
treatment of addicted persons, he was using to lock such persons in rooms in illegal manner for so many days and to administer drugs and sleeping pills
and on checking De-addiction Centre, there was possibility of recovery of drugs and persons confined illegally.
4. As the information was reliable, Drug Inspector was asked, through telephone, by SHO, to reach on the spot and local Panchayat Pradhan and
Member were also called on the spot and on their arrival, a raiding party was constituted and in Village Rinhu Seri three storeyed building of Chunni
Lal, rented to Jatin Nagar (petitioner) was raided, where petitioner, Director of ‘Maya Foundation’, was found present and he was asked to
produce permission and the documents regarding establishment/running of Drug De-addiction Centre, but he could not produce the same, whereupon,
search, in the Drug De-addiction Centre, was conducted and from the drawer of the table, in the front office, 28 medicines and two small packets of
Blood Collection Tubes, total 30 articles were recovered and seized through Drug Inspector, in accordance with law.
5. During search, one diary having entries of names of 19 patients therein, one Staff persons’ Register, two applications of Anita Ramaik and Shiv
Singh, three Stamps, two Visiting Cards of ‘Maya Foundation’ and one Laptop were also recovered and seized. Apart from this, from the
drawer of the table 17 fee payment receipts of Manav Bharti University and two other documents were also taken into possession.
6. On the basis of material recovered, it was found that petitioner was running a Drug De- addiction Centre, without permission, and was cheating and
deceiving the persons on the pretext of de-addiction and was dishonestly extorting/receiving money from them and keeping mental patients locked in
the room for many days and, therefore, case under Sections 417, 420, 342, 343 and 344 IPC was registered in Police Station Dharampur by sending a
Rukka.
7. It is the case of prosecution that petitioner had been associated with Drug De-addiction Centre ‘Arjun Kripa Trust’, Delhi and he had spent a
sufficient amount for his study by taking loan and, therefore, he was in need of money, and after completing B.A. LLB course, from Manav Bharti
University, he is doing LLM and for earning money, side by side, he planned to establish a Drug De-addiction Centre with the help of ‘Arjun Kripa
Trust’ and he took building of Chunni Lal, on rent, in Village Rinhu Seri in the year 2019 and opened a Drug De-addiction Centre in the name of
‘Maya Foundation’ and for his personal stay, he took a room/flat in the building of one Jagdish Sharma in the same Village. It is stated in status
report that petitioner has stated that as sufficient time was consumed to fulfill criteria laid down in the Guidelines of the Ministry of India and,
therefore, he could not get licence for running Drug De-addiction Centre and further that Manav Bharti University had offered incentive of
Rs.10,000/- for securing admission of ten students in the University and, therefore, in the year 2017 and 2019, admissions of 10-12 students were
managed by him and fee receipts recovered from his office pertain to those students and though owner of Manav Bharti University Raj Kumar Rana
had stayed in his house, but petitioner has nothing to do with Manav Bharti University and that a room No.501 has been allotted to him in Manav
Bharti Hostel, which is locked and he has taken one Flat in the building of Jagdish Sharma and building of Chunni Lal on rent amounting to Rs.40,000/-
and Rs.17,000/- per month respectively.
8. Further case of the police is that petitioner had misguided and motivated the people by making false statements that he was having permission.
According to police, petitioner has disclosed that he had admitted 14-15 persons for treatment and by taking advice from the Doctor on telephone, he
had been giving medicines to those persons and as he was associated with Drug De-addiction Centre Delhi, he was having some knowledge of
medicines and no mental patient had stayed with him for more than 10-15 days and he had been charging Rs.7000- Rs.8000/- per week for the
treatment.
9. It is case of prosecution that during investigation one person Padam Dass son of Sh.Dharam Dass, R/O Village Gasho, Post Office Jhakri, Tehsil
Rampur Bushahr, District Shimla, H.P. was also found present in the Centre and on inquiry, petitioner had informed that he was an employee of the
Centre. However, on 22.06.2020, Smt.Phulma Devi alongwith her sons Kulbhushan and Ram Singh had come to the Centre in Village Rinhu Seri and
had disclosed that treatment of her husband was undergoing in Doctor Virender Mohan Hospital Dharampur and during that period they became
acquainted with petitioner Jatin Nagar, who assured that treatment of mental patients was also available in his Centre. Whereupon, she had admitted
her husband in his Centre about eight months ago and since then her husband was confined by the petitioner by cheating them and petitioner had
received money from them illegally. The said Phulma Devi had identified her husband and had produced a bank receipt with respect to transfer of
amount in the account of petitioner Jatin Nagar. Her husband was handed over to her custody.
10. Room of the petitioner in the Boys Hostel has also been searched by the police where nothing was recovered related to the case registered against
the petitioner except one register and diary, which were taken into possession as admitted handwriting of the petitioner for comparison. On
comparison in the State Forensic Science Laboratory (SFSL), signatures of petitioner on questioned documents have been tallied with specimen
signatures/ handwriting of the petitioner.
11. Petitioner has been arrested on 20.06.2020 and after remaining in police custody, since 24.06.2020, he is in judicial custody. Petition preferred by
him, before learned Additional Sessions Judge-II Solan, for his bail was rejected on 27.07.2020.
12. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that on the basis of entire prosecution story a case, if any, at the most is made out for violation of
provisions of Mental Health Act, 2017, more particularly under Sections 107 and 108 of Mental Health Act which is bailable/non-cognizable offence
and there is no ingredient available on record to invoke provisions of Sections 417, 420, 342, 343 and 344 IPC and the prosecution has registered case
under these Sections of IPC, but no action has been taken under Mental Health Act. According to him, at the most, it is a case of running a Drug De-
addiction Centre, without permission and without following provisions of Mental Health Act and Rules/Regulations made thereunder. According to
learned counsel for the petitioner, Centre was raided and sealed on 20.06.2020, whereas, Padam Dass has been claimed to have been recovered from
the said Centre on 22. 06.2020, which is unbelievable and there is no person complaining cheating, deceiving or receiving any amount dishonestly by
the petitioner. and in aforesaid circumstances, petitioner is entitled for bail. 13. So far as recovery of Padam Dass is concerned, that is to be proved
during trial. However, it is stated in the status report dated 01.09.2020 that Centre was not sealed on 20.06.2020 and Padam Dass was found in the
Centre on that day, but he was introduced as a Cook/employee and keeping the said Padam Dass in the Centre by petitioner as a patient came into
knowledge of the police on 22.06.2020 only when his wife Phulma Devi alongwith her two sons came to the Centre at Village Rinhu Seri, whereupon,
entire reality about Padam Dass was revealed. This sequence of events is also corroborated from the record of police produced in the Court.
14. Though it cannot be said that ex-facie no case is made out against petitioner, however, considering entire facts and circumstances, nature and
gravity of the offence and stage of the investigation, I find that neither any fruitful purpose nor any public interest is going to be served by keeping
petitioner behind the bars.
15. Accordingly, at this stage, petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in case FIR No.79 of 2020 dated 20.06.2020, under Sections 417, 420, 342,
343 and 344 IPC, registered in Police Station Dharampur, District Solan H.P., on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with one
surety in the like amount, to the satisfaction of trial Court, subject to following conditions:-
(i) That the petitioner shall make himself available to the police or any other Investigating Agency or Court in the present case as and when required;
(ii) that the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as
to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. He shall not, in any manner, try to overawe or
influence or intimidate the prosecution witnesses;
(iii) that the petitioner shall not obstruct the smooth progress of the investigation/trial;
(iv) that the petitioner shall not commit the offence similar to the offence to which he is accused or suspected;
(v) that the petitioner shall not misuse his liberty in any manner;
(vi) that the petitioner shall not jump over the bail; and
(vii) that he shall not leave the territory of India without prior information. He shall inform the Police/Court his contact number and shall keep on
informing about change in address and contact number, if any, in future.
16. It will be open to the prosecution to apply for imposing and/or to the trial Court to impose any other condition on the petitioner as deemed
necessary in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice.
17. In case the petitioner violates any condition imposed upon him, his bail shall be liable to be cancelled. In such eventuality, prosecution may
approach the competent Court of law for cancellation of bail, in accordance with law.
18. Trial Court is directed to comply with the directions issued by the High Court, vide communication No.HHC.VIG./Misc. Instructions/93-IV.7139
dated 18.03.2013.
19. Observations made in this petition hereinbefore, shall not affect the merits of the case in any manner and are strictly confined for the disposal of
the bail application.
20. Registry to transmit a copy of this order to the trial Court through E-mail.
