POORAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) J. C. Gupta, J.

(2.) THIS is second bail application moved on behalf of the applicant. The earlier bail application has already been rejected by the order of this court dated 6-12-96.

(3.) A plain reading of the provisions of Section 50, N. D. P. S. Act indicates that before taking search under the provisions of the N. D. P. S. Act, it is incumbent upon the Officer taking search to apprise the accused of his valuable right that if he so desires the search could be taken before a Gazetted Officer or a Magistrate. Such a person is thus entitled to be informed of such a right before the search is actually taken and since the provisions of N. D. P. S. Act visit with serious penal consequences the provisions have been held to be mandatory and they have to be complied with in the manner provided under law. In Balbir Singh's case (supra) it was also held that compliance of the provisions of Section 50, N. D. P. S. Act is required only in those cases where search is taken in pursuance of a prior information regarding the presence of Narcotic Drugs or Psychotropic Substances. Where the Police Officer without any such prior information as contemplated under the provisions of N. D. P. S. Act makes a search or arrests a person in the normal course of investigation into an offence or arrests a person as a suspect under the provisions of the Cr. P. C. and when search is taken of such a person, at that stage Section 50 will not be attracted. If during such a search or arrest there is a chance recovery of Narcotic Drugs or Psychotropic Substances, then the question of making compliance of the provisions of Section 50 does not arise. Of course after such a recovery is made, the Arresting Officer has to act in accordance with other provisions of the N. D. P. S. Act.