Allowed

Jatin Sharma v. State of Hp

Himachal Pradesh HC4 Dec 2019CRMPM/2167/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Himachal Pradesh allowed a bail application filed by Jatin Sharma, a 19-year-old drug addict, accusing him of possessing heroin under the NDPS Act. The court granted bail based on his youth, local residence, lack of danger to society, and need for medical treatment.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail by furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 20,000 with one surety of similar amount.

Jatin Sharma Vs State of Hp — Medical Negligence | Himachal Pradesh HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

¶2

	Cr.MP(M) No. 2167 of 2019 Decided on: 4^thDecember, 2019
Jatin Sharma	….Petitioner Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh	…Respondent

¶3

Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Chander Bhusan Barowalia, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?¹ Yes.

¶4

For the petitioner:	Mr. Ashwani D	himan, Advocate.
For the respondent/State:	Mr. Raju Ram Thakur, Asstt.	Rahi, Dy. AG, with Mr. Ram Lal AG.
	HC Manohar Police Station H.P.	No. 58, Investigating Officer, Sadar Solan, District Solan,
____________________________ Chander Bhusan Barowal	________________ ia, Judge. (oral).	_______________________________

¶5

The present bail application has been maintained by the petitioner under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking his release in case FIR No. 179 of 2019, dated 26.08.2019, under Section 21 of the ND&PS Act, registered in Police Station Sadar Solan, District Solan, H.P.

¶6

As per the averments made in the petition, the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He is permanent resident of the place and neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice. No fruitful

¶7

1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes.

¶8

¶9

purpose will be served by keeping him behind the bars for an unlimited period, so he be released on bail.

¶10

Police report stands filed. As per the prosecution story, on 26.08.2019, a police team was on patrol duty at Dohri Diwal, Solan. Police were checking the vehicles and at about 12:25 a.m. police spotted a pedestrian, who was carrying a bag on his shoulder. On seeing the police, the said pedestrian turned confounded and started walking hastily. On suspicion, the police nabbed the said person and asked to why he is running, but he could not give any satisfactory answer. He disclosed his name as Jatin Sharma (petitioner herein). As the petitioner was baffled, so the police suspected that he might be carrying some contraband and tried to associate independent witnesses, but no one could be associated. Thereafter, the police searched the bag of the petitioner and recovered a wallet which contained a transparent polythene packet containing some light yellowish substance and two syringes. The said substance was checked through drug detection kit and found to be heroin and on weighment it was 9.70 grams. Thereafter the police completed the codal formalities and registered a case under the relevant section of the ND&PS Act. Police prepared the spot map and recorded the statements of the witnesses. The petitioner was arrested and medically examined. As per the police, during the course of interrogation the petitioner divulged that he purchased the contraband from some unknown person at New Bus Stand,

¶11

¶12

Solan. As per the chemical examination report, the contraband is tested positive for diacetylmorphine (heroin) and the syringes also tested positive for heroin. As per the police, investigation in the case is complete and on 22.10.2019 challan stands presented in the learned Trial Court. Lastly, it is prayed that the bail application of the petitioner be dismissed, as the petitioner has committed a serious crime. In case the petitioner is enlarged on bail, at this stage, he may tamper with the prosecution evidence and may also flee from justice, so the bail application of the petitioner be dismissed.

¶13

I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned Deputy Advocate General for the State and gone through the record, including the police report, carefully.

¶14

The learned Counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has further argued that the petitioner is permanent resident of the place and 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 keeping the petitioner behind the bars for an unlimited period. The petitioner is a drug addict and not a drug peddler, he is only 19 years of age and needs medical attention and counseling to quit drugs, so the petition be allowed and the petitioner may be enlarged on bail. Conversely, the learned Deputy Advocate General has argued that the petitioner has

¶15

¶16

committed a serious crime and in case he is enlarged on bail, he may tamper with the prosecution evidence and may also flee from justice, so it is prayed that the bail application of the petitioner may be dismissed.

¶17

In rebuttal the learned Counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner cannot be kept behind the bars for an unlimited period, especially when investigation in the case is complete, challan stands presented in the learned Trial Court, the custody of the petitioner is not required by the police and also in the wake of the fact that the petitioner is only 19 years of age, he is a drug addict and not a drug peddler, so the application be allowed and the petitioner be enlarged on bail. 7. At this stage, considering the age of the petitioner, who is only 19 years old, the fact that he had kept the contraband for his self consumption, he is a drug addict and not drug peddler, the quantity of the recovered contraband, the fact that the petitioner is permanent resident of the place and neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice, considering the fact that the petitioner requires medical treatment and counseling to quit drugs, the overall material, which has come on record, and without discussing the same at this stage, the petitioner is ready and willing to abide by the terms and conditions of bail, in case so granted, and also the fact that the petitioner cannot be kept behind the bars for an unlimited period, so this Court finds that the present is a fit case where the judicial discretion to admit the

¶18

¶19

petitioner on bail is required to be exercised in his favour. Accordingly, the petition is allowed and it is ordered that the petitioner, who has been arrested by the police in case FIR No. 179 of 2019, dated 26.08.2019, under Section 21 of the ND&PS Act, registered in Police Station Sadar Solan, District Solan, H.P., shall be released on bail forthwith in this case, subject to his furnishing personal bond in the sum of `20,000/- (rupees twenty thousand) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the

¶20

learned Trial Court. The bail is granted subject to the following conditions:

¶21

(i) That the petitioner will appear before the learned Trial Court/Police/authorities as and when required.

¶22

(ii) That the petitioner will not leave India without prior permission of the Court.

¶23

(iii) That the petitioner 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.

¶24

In view of the above, the petition is disposed of.

¶25

Copy dasti.

¶26

4^th December, 2019 Judge

¶27

(virender)

Jatin Sharma v. State of Hp

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jatin Sharma v. State of Hp

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

T Banambar Patra Vs State of Hp

T Banambar Patra Vs State of Hp

Vicky Shohal Vs Diksha Devi and Another

Rakesh Kumar Singh Vs State of Hp

Manish Vs State of Hp

State of Hp Vs Tilak Raj