Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. Cr.M.P.(M) No.163 of 2009. Dated of Decision: March 27, 2009. Bitu. …..… Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. ……. Respondent. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surinder Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? Yes. For the Petitioner : Mr. Vinay Thakur, Advocate. For the Respondent: Mr. J.S. Guleria, Assistant Advocate General. Surinder Singh, J (oral): The petitioner has been arrested under Section 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, in FIR No.169 of 2008, registered in Police Station Karsog on 13.10.2008, allegedly for abetting and hatching conspiracy with respect to transport of the Charas by his two co-accused. The petitioner was declined bail once by the learned Sessions Judge and thereafter by learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Mandi. In nut-shell, the case of the prosecution is that Ved Ram of village Tipper, Med Ram, of Village Tinder and the petitioner Bitu of village Mahoga, were intercepted by the police in the wee hours of the morning near Khandargali, 16 K.Ms away from Karsog while walking on the road. On seeing the police party, they got nervous and tried to escape. The Police party headed by SI Vijay Sen got suspicious. They were over-powered and on their search in 2 accordance with law 2.100 Kgs Charas was recovered from Med Ram and 5 Kgs. from Ved Ram, but nothing was recovered from the possession of the petitioner. Ved Ram, his co-accused is a Contractor in the IPH department, whereas Med Ram is a teacher. The petitioner is stated to be the Bhanja of Ved Ram, aged about 18/19 years. Med Ram has been granted bail by the learned trial court by giving the benefit of law laid down by this Court in Dharam Pal vs. State of H.P.[ Latest HLJ 2007 (HP) 827] that Charas was found in possession less than the commercial quantity, whereas the bail was declined to accused Ved Ram. On perusing the record, I do not find any legal evidence that the petitioner herein had the knowledge that his co-accused Med Ram and Ved Ram were carrying the Charas with them. Although his enlargement on bail has been objected to by the respondent, yet prima-facie I find that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the petitioner is not guilty of offence against him and there is also no likelihood of his committing any such offence while on bail, in absence of any allegations to this effect against him. Accordingly, the petitioner Bitu is hereby granted bail, on his furnishing the bail bonds in the sum of Rs.20,000/- with one surety of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mandi and this bail shall be subject to the conditions that the petitioner: (i) shall report for the investigation as and when required by the police in this case and shall be present himself in the court whenever required to do so; and (ii) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner nor shall make any 3 inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts truly to the court or to any police officer. Needless to say that in case of making infraction of any of the conditions above, the liberty of bail shall be cancelled. Any observation made hereinabove, shall have no effect to the merits of the case in any way. Let an authenticated copy of this order be sent forthwith to the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mandi, for information and necessary action. Application stands disposed of. March 27, 2009. (Surinder Singh) (Pds) Judge.