SARDAR AHMED Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition for release of the petitioner on Bail under Section 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The petitioner is alleged to have been found in possession of 50 grams of smack.

(2.) It may be relevant to point out here that the petitioner had earlier moved a petition bearing No.Crl.M(M)2204/92 for bail which was dismissed by a learned Single Judge of this Court vide order dated 25th August, 1992. The relevant portion from the aforesaid order is reproduced hereinbelow:-

(3.) Mr. Suhag, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, however, submitted that after the dismissal of the earlier petition for bail, the challan has since been filed and the petitioner has been suppllied with copies of Rukka, seizure memo etc. and relying on those documents the present petition has been filed. The learned counsel drew my attention to the "Rukka" wherein it has been stated that the police party reached behind premises No.59, G.B. Road, Delhi but at the end of the Rukka, the premises have been shown as behind premises No.60, G.B. Road, Delhi. He also pointed out a discrepancy that as per Rukka, the petitioner was apprehended at 3.30 PM but in terms of statement of the S.H.O. he reached the spot at 3.40 PM. The learned counsel further submitted that in the present case there was a violation of Section 55 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Act, 1985 (in short Act) in as much as the Rukka shows that the stamp of the 1.00. has been affixed on C.F.S.L. form and the Officer incharge of the Police Station had <PG>278</PG> not affixed his own seal. In support of his contention he placed reliance on a judgement of this Court in the case of Pradeep Kumar Vs. State, 1990(1) Chandigarh Crl. Cases, 69.