IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. Cr.M.P.(M) No. 711 of 2011. Date of decision : 22.9.2011. ____________________________________________________________ Rangeel Singh …Petitioner. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh. . …Respondent. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kuldip Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? No For the Petitioner : Mr. O.C.Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondent : Ms. Ruma Kaushik, Additional Advocate General with Mr. R.P.Singh, Assistant Advocate General. Kuldip Singh, Judge (Oral). This is an application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for releasing the petitioner on bail in FIR No. 17/2011 dated 29.6.2011 registered at Police Station CID, Shimla, under Section 61(1) (a) of the Excise Act and Sections 180 and 181 of the Motor Vehicles Act. The status report filed and the same has been perused. 2. It has been stated that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. The prosecution case according to petitioner is that on 28.6.2011 Rajinder Singh, ASI alongwith some police officials had gone towards Mandhorghat. At about 3.30 a.m. on 29.6.2011 __________________ 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the Judgment ? yes 2 they found truck No. HP-72-3482 and pick up van No.HP-03-4323 parked in the area of Mandhorghat. The goods were being shifted from the truck to pick-up van. On seeing the police, the persons involved in the shifting of the goods started running but the accused Pradeep Kumar was over-powered and he disclosed that Manish was the driver of the truck. The police checked the truck and found 2100 bottles of country liquor meant for sale at Chandigarh. In pickup van 1080 bottles of country liquor meant for sale at Chandigarh were also found. Pradeep Kumar was arrested on 29.7.2011 and he was released on bail on 2.7.2011 by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shimla. Accused Inder Dev owner of pick-up van was arrested on 27.7.2011 and was released on bail on 29.7.2011 by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shimla. Mohan Singh accused was arrested on 28.7.2011 and he was released on bail on 1.8.2011 by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shimla. 3. The petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. On 28.5.2011 the petitioner has executed an agreement with Pradeep Kumar whereby truck No. HP-72-3482 has been leased out at monthly lease of ` 30,000/-. The petitioner handed over the possession of the truck No. HP-72-3482 to Pradeep Kumar in pursuance of agreement dated 28.5.2011. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in view of registration of the case. The police story is false and fabricated. The petitioner took medical treatment on 28.6.2011 in PHC Sohari Takoli. The petitioner filed an application for anticipatory bail which has been dismissed by the learned Sessions Judge, Shimla on 19.8.2011.The petitioner is ready to join the investigation and furnish bail bonds in 3 accordance with the directions of this Court. A prayer has been made for releasing the petitioner on bail. 4. The bail application has been opposed by the learned Additional Advocate General on the basis of status report. It has been stated in the status report that the police party found truck No. HP-72-3482 and pick up van No. HP-63-4323 at an isolated place and some persons were shifting the goods from truck into pickup van. On seeing the police, the persons who were shifting the goods ran away but one of them Pradeep Kumar was over powered. On search, 2100 bottles of country liquor in boxes were recovered from the truck and 1080 bottles of country liquor were recovered from the pickup van. The sampling and sealing were done on the spot. No permit/licence was shown for carrying the liquor. On these facts, the case was registered. It has been stated in the status report that the petitioner after 15.9.2011 joined the investigation only on 19.9.2011 and not on any other date. A prayer has been made for dismissal of the bail application. 5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. On 15.9.2011 the petitioner was directed to report to the concerned Investigating Officer on 16.9.2011 at 10.00 a.m. He is not co-operating in the investigation. The investigating agency has disclosed that the petitioner has not produced original agreement. The agreement relied by the petitioner with Pradeep Kumar could not be verified for want of co-operation from the petitioner. FIR Nos. 59/2002, 27/2004, 99/2007 have been registered against the petitioner at Police Station Bangana. The case arising out of FIR No. 99/2007 is pending and in the other 4 two cases, he has been acquitted. FIR No. 165/2007 under Excise Act is registered against petitioner at Police Station, Nadaun. However, in that case also, he has been acquitted. FIR No. 13/2005 under Excise Act has been registered against the petitioner at Police Station, Talai which is pending before JMIC, Ghumarwin. It appears that the petitioner is a habitual offender. The petitioner is owner of truck, how huge country liquor was carried in the truck without any permit is to be investigated. In these circumstances, in order to find out the truth, thorough investigation of the case is required and at this stage, the petitioner is not entitled to indulgence of bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. Resultantly, the petition fails and is dismissed. 6. The observations made in this judgment are for disposal of bail application only and the same shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. September 22, 2011. (Kuldip Singh) (GR) Judge.