HC declines bail in drugs case after finding that accused is habitual offender

Read Order: Sahil Khan v. State of Haryana 

LE Correspondent

Chandigarh, August 4, 2021: The Punjab and Haryana High Court has rejected the bail plea of an accused in a drugs case after finding that as many as seven other cases are pending against him, making him a habitual offender.

As the state counsel apprised the court of details of the FIRs registered against the accused, the bench of Justice HS Madaan stated that the petitioner is a habitual criminal and if granted concession of bail, there is every likelihood of his absconding and giving threats to the prosecution witnesses so as to make them resile from their statements. 

The HC then disallowed the petition for bail.

The petition for regular bail was filed by petitioner Sahil Khan, accused in an FIR dated 25.11.2020, under Sections 21-B of NDPS Act, 1985, registered with Police Station City, Tohana, District Fatehabad.

In nutshell, according to the prosecution a motorcycle being driven by Kuldeep @ Kukkan, a resident of Bazigar Mohalla, Tohana was apprehended on 25.11.2020, by a police party headed by ASI Om Parkash, in the area of Ratia Turning, Tohana on Bhuna bye-pass within the jurisdiction of Police Station City, Tohana, District Fatehabad. The present petitioner Sahil Khan was pillion riding that motorcycle.

Personal search of both the riders was conducted as per law, which resulted in recovery of 7 gms of heroin from the pocket of Kuldeep @ Kukkan, whereas petitioner Sahil Khan was also found to be in possession of 7 gms of heroin in a plastic pouch, which he was carrying in the his pocket, the prosecution said. The recovered contraband was seized and the two accused were arrested in the case.

“After hearing the rival contentions, I find that though the recovery of contraband effected in this case amounts to non-commercial quantity and bar of Section 37 of NDPS does not come into play but considering the fact that the petitioner is involved in seven more criminal cases, he comes out to be a habitual criminal,” the Bench held. 

“The apprehension expressed by the State counsel that if petitioner is granted bail, there is every likelihood to his absconding and even tampering with the prosecution evidence cannot be brushed aside lightly. The petitioner, if allowed regular bail, may prove to be a threat to public peace and tranquility by indulging in criminal activities again since he is also involved in several criminal cases relating to heinous crime,” stated the bench.