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
3 paragraphs · 197 wordsM.L. Singhal, J.
Heard. Accordingly to the prosecution, 20 kgs. of poppy husk was recovered from the possession of the accused on 11.10.1998. Accordingly to the prosecution, this recovery was witnessed by one Bholu Singh. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that if this recovery had been witnessed by Bholu Singh, seal after use, in all probability, would have been handed over to him whereas seal after use was allegedly handed over to HC Satwinder Singh. He submits that there has been noncompliance with the provisions of section 50 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 by ASI Gurmit Singh as if he had intended at their compliance in true perspective, he would have effected the search of the petitioner in the presence of a gazetted officer or a Magistrate. He submits that no wonder, he manipulated the statement of the petitioner wherethrough he allegedly declined to be taken to a gazetted officer or a Magistrate for search and reposed faith and confidence in ASI Gurmit Singh.
Without stretching these submission further, I feel bail should be allowed to the petitioner. So, bail to him to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sangrur.