IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr.M.P.M. No. 675 of 2008. Date of decision: 10.7.2008. Jitender Kumar ….. Petitioner. Vs. State of H.P. …. Respondent. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kuldip Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner : Mr. Anup Chitkara, Advocate. For the Respondent : Mr. Ansul Bansal, Addl. Advocate General. Kuldip Singh, Judge (oral). The petitioner has filed the present application, under Section 439 Cr.P.C., for releasing him on bail in FIR No. 41, registered on 29.3.2008 at Police Station, Anni, under Sections 20 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, the Act). The respondent has filed status report. 2. Heard and gone through the record. On the basis of rukka dated 29.3.2008, FIR No. 41 was registered at Police Station, Anni on 29.3.2008 under Sections 20 and 29 of the Act. The police case in brief is that the police party was near Samsar for routine checking. At about 6.40 p.m., jeep bearing No. HP-35B-0177 came from Gugra side, it was singalled to stop and when it stopped Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? …2… three persons including driver were found sitting on the front seat of the jeep. The moment driver was asked to show the papers of the jeep, two persons who were sitting in the jeep escaped from the jeep by opening the other window and ran away. One person was holding an envelop and the other person was carrying a bag. One of them was overpowered by the ASI and other police men. The other person threw the bag on the road and ran towards the nalla and escaped from there. The person who was caught, on inquiry disclosed his name Kehar Singh. The jeep driver disclosed his name Rinku. On further inquiry, the driver of the jeep told that Kehar Singh and Jebi Ram boarded his jeep a little away from Gugra, Jebi Ram was holding a bag and so also Kehar Singh. He was not aware what they were carrying with them. The bag which was thrown by Jebi Ram was searched and it was found to contain charas. There was no arrangement of light and other facilities, therefore, nothing else could be done on the spot. On this ASI, other police men, Kehar Singh and driver came alongwith jeep to the Police Station at 7.15 p.m. The charas found in the bag was recovered, weighed and it was found to be 5 Kgs. The charas was taken into possession, sampling, sealing and other legal formalities were done. The polythene envelop, which Kehar Singh was carrying was also searched with his consent and it was found to contain Rs.1,20,000/- in cash. The said amount was recovered and taken into possession. Thereafter rukka was sent for registration of the case. Kehar Singh was arrested on 30.3.2008. …3… 3. During investigation Kehar Singh disclosed that petitioner had given Rs.1,90,000/- to him and Jebi Ram for purchasing 15 Kgs. charas, but only 5 Kgs. charas could be purchased by them instead of 15 Kgs. for Rs.70,000/- and the balance amount of Rs.1,20,000/- remained with Kehar Singh. It has also come in investigation that petitioner and Kehar Singh on that day had gone to Anni bazaar for locating third accused Jebi Ram and thereafter petitioner handed over the money to Kehar Singh and Jebi Ram for purchasing charas. The petitioner was arrested on 3.4.2008. The house and shop of the petitioner were searched on 5.4.2008, from his house two pass books in the name of petitioner, one pass book in the name of his wife were recovered. In the pass books of the petitioner many cash transactions in the recent past were found. A diary was also recovered from the shop of the petitioner in which transactions of lacs of rupees were recorded. It has been alleged that the transactions noted in the diary are with respect to sale and purchase of charas. The Handwriting Expert has opined that the questioned handwritings of the diary are written by the same person. The call details of mobile phone of petitioner from 27.3.2008 to 30.3.2008 were also obtained. It was found that on 29.3.2008, petitioner from 11.00 a.m. to 8.00 p.m. talked many times with accused Kehar Singh on his mobile phone No. 981759362 and with accused Jebi Ram on his mobile phone No. 9817234652. On 29.3.2008 even after 6.40 p.m. at 8.12 p.m. the petitioner talked to Jebi Ram. The petitioner in six months has deposited eighteen lacs rupees. The police came forward with the case that petitioner deals …4… in bulk charas and uses other persons as carriers. Kehar Singh is an employee of the petitioner. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. There is no worth believing legal material so as to connect the petitioner with the offence. The petitioner has been implicated falsely just on suspicion with no legal basis. The bank transactions, diary notes do not establish the involvement of the petitioner in the case. As per police, 5 Kgs. charas was recovered from the bag, which was allegedly with Jebi Ram accused. The statement of Kehar Singh which was allegedly given to the police cannot be used against the petitioner. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that prima facie there is no case against the petitioner and therefore, bar of Section 37 of the Act is not attracted. 5. I have considered the rival contentions of the parties. The prosecution case is that 5 Kgs. charas was recovered from the bag which accused Jebi Ram was carrying with him, who has absconded. It is also the case of the prosecution that Rs.1,90,000/- was given by the present petitioner to Kehar Singh and Jebi Ram for purchasing 15 Kgs. charas, but they could purchase only 5 Kgs. charas for Rs.70,000/- and balance amount of Rs.1,20,000/- was left with accused Kehar Singh, which was recovered during investigation. There is very serious allegation against the petitioner that he deals in selling and purchasing of bulk contraband and uses the carriers for this purpose. The prosecution has relied on the diary recovered from the shop of the petitioner and also on his bank accounts. Kehar …5… Singh is an employee of the petitioner from whom Rs.1,20,000/- in cash were recovered. There is no explanation why Kehar Singh was carrying Rs.1,20,000/- with him. The investigating agency has also traced out mobile phone talks of petitioner with Kehar Singh and Jebi Ram at the relevant time and atleast one call of petitioner with Jebi Ram even after he ran away from the spot after 6.40 p.m. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner has not made out a case for releasing him on bail. 6. As a result of the above discussion, the application is dismissed. Any observation made herein above shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. July 10, 2008. ( Kuldip Singh ) (Hem) Judge.