IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA Cr.M.P. (M) No. 732/2010 Date of decision: 29. 7. 2010 Kartar Singh ….Petitioner Versus State of H.P. ……Respondent Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surinder Singh, J. Whether approved for reporting ?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Vinay Thakur, Advocate. For the respondent : Mr. J.S. Rana, Assistant Advocate General. Surinder Singh J. (Oral) The petitioner was arrested in case FIR No. 15 of 2010 registered on 31.1.2010, under Sections 18 and 20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (in short ‘the Act’), for allegedly keeping in possession 1.300 grams of charas and 1.400 grams of opium along with his co-accused Gautam Dat Kalia. The said Gautam Dat Kalia was granted bail by this Court on 21.5.2010. The bail was denied to the present petitioner by the court of Sessions hence the present application for bail. 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?. yes - 2 - 2. In short, prosecution case is that on 31.1.2010 the police party headed by SHO Chand Mishra was present at Jaon –Sarahan Bifurcation road. Around 6.30 p.m., Car No. PB-07K-0098 (Alto) came from the side of Bagipull. It was stopped for checking. Gautam Dat Kali was sitting on the driving wheel and the present petitioner was sitting on the front seat besides him. Identity of the driver as well as of the petitioner were asked. Police noticed a bag lying in between both in the front portion of the vehicle. Police entertained a suspicion. It was secluded place. No independent witness was present. The option was given by the said police officer to the petitioner and his co- accused to satisfy the provision of Section 50 of the Act for their search by the police or before Magistrate or a Gazetted officer. They opted to be searched by the police party present there. On checking the vehicle, police recovered the above quantity of the narcotics from the bag aforesaid. Samples of each of the items were separated as per law thereafter sealed the case property. The sample of seal was also taken separately. Rukka was sent for the registration of the case. The case property was deposited in the Malkhana and samples of each of the aforesaid recovered stuff were sent for the examination. As per report of the Forensic Science one - 3 - sample contained morphine to the extent of 2.08% and other contained resin to the extent of 28.51% weight in weight. Both these quantities are less than the “commercial quantity”. Therefore, in my opinion, rigor of Section 37 would not apply. 3. There is no criminal history against the petitioner. The petitioner is stated to have taken lift in the car with Gautam Dat Kalia. 4. Challan stands presented in the court but charge not framed as yet. The petitioner is local resident of Tehcil Nirmal District Kullu and has roots in the Society as such the petitioner, more specifically when there is no allegation of jumping the bail, fleeing from the course of justice, he can be safely enlarged on bail on suitable terms and conditions. Therefore, the petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail on his furnishing person bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Judicial magistrate Rampur and this bail shall be subject to the conditions that the petitioner: (a) shall attend the court one ach and every date of hearing till the termination of the trial and to the Investigating Officer as and when required to do so in this case. (b) shall not terrorize the prosecution witnesses in any manner. - 4 - (c ) shall not make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts and circumstances of this case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or the Police officer. (d) Shall not indulge in any criminal activity in future. 5. Needless to say in case he commits any breach of any of the conditions above, the liberty of bail shall be cancelled. 6. Any observation, made hereinabove is strictly for the disposal of this bail petition and shall not mean any expression on the merits of the case. 7. Let an authenticated copy of this order be sent to the learned Judicial Magistrate, Rampur forthwith for his information and necessary action at his end. 8. The copy be supplied to the counsel for the petitioner, if applied urgently, as per rules. The application stands disposed of. July 29, 2010 (Surinder Singh),J (cm)