Chandigarh court rejects fourth bail plea of 67-year-old in NDPS case

The court noted that Kharati Lal had earlier been declared a proclaimed offender in the present case and also continued to be a convicted proclaimed offender in a separate bank robbery case in HP

A special court has rejected the fourth bail application of 67 year-old Kharati Lal, accused of conspiring to plant 1kg ganja in the car of an advocate to allegedly falsely implicate him in an Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act case.

Opposing the plea, the prosecution highlighted the accused’s previous history of evading the legal process and dismissed his bail. (HT File)

The court noted that Kharati Lal had earlier been declared a proclaimed offender in the present case and also continued to be a convicted proclaimed offender in a separate bank robbery case in Himachal Pradesh.

According to the prosecution, the case dates back to September 24, 2022, when police recovered three packets containing 502 grams, 463 grams and 400 grams of ganja from a Honda car belonging to advocate Ashok Sehgal in Sector 11. The FIR was initially registered against an unknown person under Section 20 of the NDPS Act.

During investigation, Sehgal told police about an ongoing property dispute with Kharati Lal and his family members. The prosecution alleged that the call-details showed that the phone number from which the police received the initial information was linked to Kharati Lal and that the investigation indicated a conspiracy to plant the contraband in Sehgal’s vehicle.

Seeking bail, his counsel argued that there was no CCTV footage or eyewitness linking him to the vehicle and no contraband had been recovered from his conscious possession. The counsel also cited his age, previous liver-transplant surgery and prolonged custody.

Opposing the plea, the prosecution highlighted his previous history of evading the legal process. The court was also told that he obtained a temporary suspension of sentence in the Himachal Pradesh bank robbery case, in which he was sentenced to 10 years, but failed to surrender thereafter.

The court observed that his history of absconding, coupled with the serious allegations in the present case, raised concerns that he could evade the legal process again if released on bail. It also noted that material prosecution witnesses were yet to be examined and allegations had been made that he attempted to influence a witness while in judicial custody.

The court accordingly dismissed the bail application. Directions for his regular medical examination and post-operative care following his liver transplant were ordered to remain in force.