Rang Lal vs State of Haryana

Sat Pal, J.

This petition has been filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short, the Code), seeking bail in the case registered under Section 18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short the Act), vide FIR No. 18, dated 25th January, 1995, at Police Station G.R.P. Hissar.

Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the petitioner was apprehended by the Police party headed by SHO G.R.P. Hissar, on 25th January, 1995, and as a result of his search, opium weighing 3 Kgs. was recovered from him.

Mr. Thind, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, has drawn my attention to the FIR, true English translation of which has been reproduced in Para 2 of the petition. In the FIR, it has been stated that a written notice was given to the petitioner asking him if he wanted to be searched before a Gazetted Officer or before the SHO because some intoxicant material may be with him. Learned counsel submits that there is a clear violation of the mandatory provision i.e. of Section 50 of the NDPS Act, inasmuch as the petitioner was not given any option to be searched before the Magistrate. He, therefore, contended that the petitioner should be enlarged on bail. In support of his submission, the learned counsel placed reliance on a judgment of the Supreme Court in the case, State of Punjab v. Balbir Singh, 1994(1) RCR(Crl.) 736 and a judgement of the Delhi High Court in the case, of Manak Chand Jain v. State, 1994(3) RCR(Crl.) 449 .

I have given my anxious consideration to the submission made by the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record. From the FIR it is evident that the petitioner was not given the option to be searched before a Magistrate. In view of these facts, there appears to be a prima facie violation of Section 50 of the NDPS Act. However, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the view that it is a fit case for grant of bail. Accordingly, I direct the petitioner shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 50,000/ with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of C.J.M. Hissar. The observations made hereinabove shall not have any bearing on the merits of the case.

JUDGMENT accordingly.