AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
5 paragraphs · 208 wordsK.C. Gupta, J.—The petitioner has been booked in FIR No. 161 dated 31.12.2000 u/s 20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 registered at Police Station Division No. 2, Ludhiana, for keeping in her possession one kg. opium without any permit.
Counsel for the petitioner contented that the petitioner was not given any offer to get herself searched in the presence of a Magistrate or a Gazetted Officer but she was given the offer whether she wanted to get herself searched before the Inspector or not. Learned counsel submitted that there is a non- compliance of the provisions of Section 50 of the N.D.P.S. Act.
Learned A AG contended that in the ruqa it is mentioned that the petitioner if so wanted could be searched in the presence of a Magistrate or a Gazetted Officer but she told that she did not want to get herself searched before a Gazetted Officer or Magistrate. He further contends that D.S.P. was called and the petitioner was searched in his presence.
Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, and without commenting on the merits of the case, let the petitioner be admitted to bail to the satisfaction of C.J.M., Ludhiana.
Petition allowed