Chander Bhusan Barowalia, J
1. The matters are taken up through video conference.
2. The present bail applications have been maintained by the petitioners under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking their release, in
the event of their arrest, in case FIR No. 91 of 2020, dated 30.06.2020, under Section 21 of the ND&PS Act, registered in Police Station Indora,
District Kangra, H.P.
3. As per the averments made in the petitions, the petitioners are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. They are permanent
residents of the place and neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice. No fruitful purpose will be
served by sending them behind the bars, so they be released on bail.
4. Police reports stand filed. The prosecution story, as it emanates from the records, is that on 30.06.2020 a police team was on patrol duty and at
about 04:30 p.m., at place Ulehdiyan, police got a secret tip-off that Manjeet Kumar and his wife Roji (petitioners herein) deals in heroin and in case
their house is raided, huge quantity of contraband can be recovered. Acting the secret tip-off, police formed a raiding party by associating two
independent witnesses and they started towards the house of the petitioners. Somehow, petitioners spotted the police party coming, so they fled from
the back door of the house. They were chased, but could not be nabbed. Thereafter, the premises of the petitioners were checked and some brownish
substance, wrapped in a polythene packet, was recovered. The said substance was found to be heroin and on weighment alongwith the polythene
packet, it was found to be 6.30 grams. Thereafter the police completed all the codal formalities. Police prepared the spot map and statements of the
witnesses were recorded. The recovered contraband, on being chemically tested, was found to be heroin. Despite extensive search, the petitioners
could not be traced. As per the police, many cases under the ND&PS Act have been registered against the petitioners. The petitioners are spreading
the menace of narcotics in the society, so there is anger against them in the society. Lastly, it is prayed that the bail applications of the petitioners be
dismissed, as the petitioners were found involved in a serious crime. They are time and again repeating the same offence and there is possibility that in
case at this stage, if the petitioners are enlarged on bail, they may flee from justice. The petitioners can also tamper with the prosecution evidence, so
their bail applications be dismissed.
5. I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioners, learned Additional Advocate General for the State and gone through the records, including the
police report, carefully.
6. The learned Counsel for the petitioners has argued that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the present case. He has further argued that
the petitioners are permanent residents of the place, so they are neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee
from justice. He has further argued that no fruitful purpose will be served by sending the petitioners behind the bars. The petitioners are ready and
willing to join the investigation and co-operate with the police. Now, nothing remains to be recovered from the petitioners. He has further argued that
the custody of the petitioners is not at all required by the police, so the bail applications be allowed. Conversely, the learned Additional Advocate
General has argued that the petitioners were found involved in a serious offence and many more cases under the ND&PS Act have been registered
against them. The petitioners are habitual offenders and they are spreading the menace of narcotics in the society, so, in case at this stage, if the
petitioners are enlarged on bail, they may tamper with the prosecution evidence and may also flee from justice. He has prayed that the bail application
of the petitioners be dismissed.
7. In rebuttal the learned Counsel for the petitioners has argued that the petitioners are neither in a position to flee from justice nor in a position to
tamper with the prosecution evidence, as they are permanent resident of the place. Their custodial interrogation is not at all required by the police, as
the petitioners are ready and willing to join the investigation and co-operate with the police, nothing remains to be recovered at the instance of the
petitioners, so the instant bail applications be allowed and the petitioners be enlarged on bail.
8. At this stage, after considering the different facets of the case in hand, considering the quantity of the recovered contraband, the fact that the
petitioners are permanent residents of the place, so they are neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from
justice, they are ready and willing to join the investigation and co-operate with the police, the petitioners are also ready to abide by the terms and
conditions of the bail, in case granted, now the custody of the petitioners is not at all required by the police and also considering the overall facts, which
have come on record, and without discussing the same at this stage, this Court finds that the present is a fit case where the judicial discretion to admit
the petitioners on bail, in the event of their arrest, is required to be exercised in their favour. Accordingly, the petitions are allowed and it is ordered
that the petitioners, in the event of their arrest, in case FIR No. 91 of 2020, dated 30.06.2020, under Section 21 of the ND&PS Act, registered in
Police Station Indora, District Kangra, H.P., shall be released on bail forthwith in this case, subject to their furnishing personal bond in the sum of
`25,000/- (rupees twenty five thousand) each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer. The bail is
granted subject to the following conditions:
(i) That the petitioners will appear before the learned Trial Court/Police/authorities as and when required.
(ii) That the petitioners will not leave India without prior permission of the Court.
(iii) That the petitioners will 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/her from disclosing such facts to the Investigating Officer or Court.
9. In view of the above, the petitions are disposed of. Copy dasti.
