Apu Deb vs State Of Tripura

Arindam Lodh, J

This is a bail application filed by the accused-petitioner, Sri Apu Deb praying for bail in connection with Sidhai P.S. Case No.4 of 2022, registered under Section 20(b)(ii)(c)/29 of the NDPS Act,1985.

Heard Mr. P. Sen Choudhury, learned counsel appearing for the accused-petitioner and Mr. Ratan Datta, learned counsel appearing for the State-respondents.

The background fact of the instant case is that, the accused-petitioner was driving a vehicle in a place under Sidhai Police Station. The vehicle met with an accident and got seriously damaged due to repeated dashing by another vehicle which was driven by two persons. The accused-petitioner’s case is that the persons driving that vehicle attempted to kill him. The accused-petitioner, namely, Sri Apu Deb suffered grievous injuries and he was taken to Mohanpur Hospital wherefrom he was shifted to AGMC & GBP Hospital, Agartala. Considering the seriousness of his condition, he was referred to Kolkata for better treatment. Accident had taken place on 14th January, 2022 at about 6-10 pm. The vehicle was so damaged to move to any place. Thereafter, Fire Brigade personnel came and rescued the accused-petitioner. Police had reached the spot after two hours and cordoned the vehicle. On the next date, i.e. on 15.01.2022, the vehicle was taken to the Sidhai Police Station at 21:10 hours i.e. at 9.10 pm. On 16.04.2022 the father of the accused-petitioner lodged an FIR alleging that the persons of the dashing vehicle tried to kill his son. That statement was recorded by a Woman S.I. in connection with Sidhai P.S. Case No.08/2022. The father of the accused-petitioner also informed the matter to the Superintendent of Police.

It is the case of the prosecution that after taking the vehicle to the Sidhai P.S. they found 22 Kgs. of cannabis and some packets of Yaba tablets inside the vehicle and accordingly, the present case was registered under Section 20(b)(ii)(c)/29 of the NDPS Act,1985. The accused-petitioner returned to his house at Mohanpur on completion of his treatment at Kolkata after a year. Having found that a case was registered against him under the aforesaid provisions of NDPS Act, he submitted an application for granting anticipatory bail before this Court. This court had rejected the anticipatory bail of the accused-petitioner and directed the petitioner to surrender before the trial court. Accordingly, the accused-petitioner had surrendered before the trial court and he was taken to judicial custody and till now he is in custody.

By means of filing the present application, the petitioner has sought for granting bail on the ground that he was totally innocent and falsely implicated with this case. The case is the result of conspiracy hatched by the persons who tried to kill him. He had no connection with peddling of contraband goods seized from the vehicle and it was a manufactured story out of some political rivalry.

On the other hand, Mr. Datta, learned P.P. appearing for the State-respondent has strongly opposed the bail application of the accused-petitioner. He submitted the case diary. I have perused the case diary. Mr. Datta, learned P.P. has drawn the attention of this court that the accused-petitioner is a habitual drug peddler and a case is also pending under the NDPS Act against him and charge-sheet has been filed. Mr. Datta, learned P.P. has further submitted that in the present case, the accused-petitioner was involved of trading commercial quantity of contraband goods and according to learned P.P., it is not a fit case for granting bail to the accused-petitioner at this stage.

I have considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel appearing for the parties.

After consideration of all aspects and on perusal of the case diary, in my opinion, this is a case where there is chance of manufacturing story to implicate the accused-petitioner in connection with this case out of some extraneous conspiracy. I question myself why the vehicle which was driven by the accused-petitioner had been dashed by another vehicle repeatedly? In my opinion, there was a clear intention to cause bodily harm to the accused-petitioner. Another factor which strikes the mind of this court is that, the vehicle which was driven by the present petitioner met with the accident on 6:10 pm on 14.01.2022. He suffered grievous injury on various parts of his body. After an hour, the Fire Brigade personnel came and rescued him and taken to hospital. The place of occurrence is not far away from the Sidhai Police Station. It is a small area. The question is why the police personnel had arrived at the spot after two hours of the incident and surprising enough, the police personnel did not take any steps against those persons who were inside the said offending vehicle which dashed and damaged the vehicle of the petitioner and intended to kill the petitioner. Another question, why the vehicle was detained there for such long hours and taken to Sidhai Police Station on the next date at 9:10 pm? All those aforesaid eventualities influenced me to come to a finding about the suspicious act of the police officials as well as the persons who attempted to kill the accused-petitioner by repeatedly dashing the vehicle of the accused-petitioner. There was every chance of keeping contraband articles inside the vehicle by the conspirators. Moreover, the accused-petitioner was under treatment for more than a year and he came and as per the direction of the court he surrendered to the court. In mind of all those aspects, I am satisfied myself at this stage that there is reasonable grounds for believing that the accused-petitioner is not guilty of the offence alleged to be committed by him.

This court is well conscious about the limitations of granting bail in connection with the offence committed under the NDPS Act. In the instant case, I have already said that the incident happened just after the accident satisfies me that it may be a false case against the accused-petitioner at this stage.

In view of above, this court is inclined to enlarge the accused-petitioner to go on bail.

Accordingly, accused-petitioner, namely Sri Apu Deb shall be released on bail in connection with Sidhai P.S. Case No.04 of 2022, registered under Section 20(b)(ii)(c)/29 of the NDPS Act,1985 on furnishing a bond of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh) with 2(two) sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of learned Special Judge, Court No.4, West Tripura, Agartala on condition that the accused-petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of Sidhai Police Station without permission of the Officer-in-Charge of the Police Station. Further, the accused-petitioner shall appear before the I.O. twice in a week until further order; he will not evade the trial and will not influence the witnesses of the case in any manner whatsoever.

Needless to say, the petitioner will not involve in any other similar kind of case in future.

With the aforesaid observations and directions, the instant bail application stands allowed and disposed.

Return the case diary.