Devinder Singh And Others vs N.C.B

Anoop Chitkara, J

The petitioners, who are in custody since 29th December 2020 for possessing 11.7 kilograms of Charas recovered from the car, in which they were

transporting the same, have come up before this Court seeking regular bail.

A perusal of the petition reveals that the petitioner straightaway filed the bail petition before High Court, which is permissible given the decision of a

three Judges Bench of HP High Court, in Mohan Lal v Prem Chand, AIR 1980 HP 36, (Para 9 & 15), wherein the Full bench holds that a person can

directly apply for an anticipatory bail or regular bail to the High Court without first invoking the jurisdiction of the Sessions Court.

The petition is silent about the criminal history. Mr. B.R. Kashyap, learned counsel, submits that the petitioner has no criminal history. The status

report is also silent about criminal history.

Briefly, the allegations against the petitioners are that the Narcotic Control Bureau received a secret information on 29th December, 2020, to the

effect that two persons are transporting huge quantity of charas in their Alto Car No. xxxxxx. The informant further said that those persons would

reach at Yashwant Parmar Chowk, Nahan around 11.00 p.m. on 29th December, 2020. On this the Narcotic Control Bureau officials reached at the

spot and kept surveillance. They also associated two independent witnesses. On noticing the said vehicle, it was stopped, which led to recovery of

charas weighing 11.7 kilograms. After completing the procedural requirement under the Cr.P.C. and NDPS Act, the investigator arrested both the

accused. Based on these allegations, the Police registered the FIR mentioned above.

Mr. B.R. Kashyap, learned counsel has argued that the petitioners are in jail for more than three months, there is no criminal history, they are

willing to join the investigation, they are local inhabitants, they have minor children and aged parents to support and they are the only bread earners of

the family.

Mr. Ashwani Pathak, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Sandeep Sharma, Advocate has argued that the quantity involved is commercial and

rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act placed in statute book by the Legislator create conditions under which the Court can grant bail and not as a

routine. He further argued that the petitioner has failed to make out a case for bail.

The recovery of the contraband is from a private car, in which both the petitioners were present. A perusal of the bail petition does not reveal a

specific stand taken about the presence in the vehicle or knowledge of the contraband. Under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, the burden is entirely on

the petitioners to meet the twin conditions, which they failed to do so.

Given above, the petitioners have failed to make out a case for bail, as such the petitions are dismissed.