DEBAJIT KALITA Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application, filed under Section 439 Cr.PC, praying for bail of the accusedpetitioner, namely, Debajit Kalita, in connection with NCB Crime/Case No. 12/2018 under Section 8(c)/29 of the NDPS Act.

(2.) Heard Dr. B.N. Gogoi, learned counsel for the accused-petitioner as well as Mr. S.C. Keyal, learned Assistant Solicitor General of India, on behalf of NCB. Learned counsel for the accused-petitioner has submitted that the accused-petitioner has been in custody since 7.7.2018, and as such, 181 days as on date. By making such submission he has tried to impress upon the court that the statutory period of 180 days, during investigation, is over, and therefore, he is entitled to bail. But, the learned Assistant Solicitor General, Mr. S.C. Keyal, has submitted that charge-sheet in the case has already been laid before the learned Special Judge, Kamrup (M), within 180 days. Therefore, the above submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner has no leg to stand on its own. The second submission made by the learned counsel for the accused-petitioner is that although the contraband seized is claimed to be of commercial quantity, by the NCB in their FIR, yet the codeine contents of the seized Cough-Syrup, if taken into consideration, the same would fall above small quantity and below the commercial quantity. He has counted the codeine contents and had placed before the court that the contents of the contraband found would be below the commercial quantity and above the small quantity, and as such, the statutory period within which the investigation ought to have been completed is 60 days. The learned Assistant Solicitor General, Mr. Keyal, to resist this argument, has referred to the order of this court, dated 17.12.2018, passed in Bail Application No. 2529/2018, which contains an observation that, in Hira Singh and Anr. Vs- Union of India and Anr. reported in (2017) 8 SCC 162 , that in the said case the Hon'ble Supreme Court doubted the proposition laid down in the case of E. Michel Raj-VS- Narcotic Control Bureau reported in (2008) 5 SCC 161 that the aggregate quantity of the pure contents of the contraband articles recovered from the possession of the accused-petitioner needs to be considered and not the whole mixture.

(3.) Mr. S.C. Keyal, learned Assistant Solicitor General of India, placing reliance on a notification published in the Gazzettte on 18th November, 2009, submits that clauses (vii a) (A) and (xxiii a) of Section 2 of the NDPS Act has been amended, whereby, it is provided that entire mixture or solution has to be taken into consideration and not only the pure contraband used in the mixture. The said amendment is reproduced below :