SURENDRA MISHRA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RAVINDRA Singh, J. Heard Sri Manish Tiwary learned Counsel for the applicant, and the learned AGA.

(2.) FROM the perusal of the record, it reveals that a FIR was lodged against the applicant by Sri Gorakh Nath Pandey, Station Officer of Police Station Gaura Badshahpur on 26-9-2004 at 5. 10 a. m. under Section 8/20 of NDPS Act.

(3.) IT is opposed by the learned AGA by submitting that in the present case, search was made by Dy. S. P. (Circle Officer) who had reached at the place of occurrence prior to the arrest of the applicant and in such circumstances there was no legal requirement to place the option before the applicant for giving search before the Gazetted Officer of the Magistrate. IT is further contended that the recovery is not supported by any public witness. IT is replied by the learned AGA by submitting that a proper attempt was made to collect the public witness but no public witness was ready to become the witness of the alleged recovery. IT is further contended by the learned AGA that the recovered quantity of the Ganja is too much and it is above the commercial quantity.