ABDUL HASAN Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BHANWAR Singh, J. Heard learned Counsel for both the parties and perused the recovery memo and other documen tary evidence filed by both the parties.

(2.) ACCORDING to the prosecution case, the applicant Abdul Hassan was found in possession of two bottles of controlled sub stance, namely, Acetic Anhydride, which is generally used for manufacturing morphine. His search also yielded to recovery of Acetic chlon. The applicant has denied the recovery and has also controverted having executed the documents, Annexures CA-1 and CA-2. ACCORDING to him, he had written these documents under pressure the Narcotic Drugs authorities. In other words, he says that he was asked to execute these two deeds. Learned Counsel appearing for the ap plicant has argued that mere possession of the controlled substances is no offence and in support of his argument, he has relied upon the citation reported in 1996 Crl. Law Journal 845, Bheru Lal v. State of Rajasthan. In this judgment of the Rajasthan High Court, it has been held that mere posses sion of Acetic Anhydride without there being any evidence to establish that the accused supplied it for preparation of brown sugar, if no offence, or punishable under the Act. If the written papers, An nexures CA-1 and CA-2 filed by the op posite parties are not taken into con sideration on the ground of the applicant having stated that the same were got writ ten by the departmental, athorities under pressure, there is no evidence against the applicant to show and pro that he had any intention to use this controlled sub stance for preparation of brown sugar or any other narcotic drug of prohibited degree. The applicant has stated that no other prohibited substance, such as opium etc. , was found in his possession. Also there is no evidence that he intended to supply the recovered substance to some one who was indulging in preparation of brown sugar etc. Having regard to all these facts and circumstances and the principle of law laid down by the Rajasthan High Court, I am of the view that the applicant Abdul Hassan deserves to be released on bail. Let him therefore, be released on his execut ing adequate bail-bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court concerned. Bail granted. .