(1.) HEARD . As per the prosecution, 7 kgs. of poppy husk was recovered from the possession of the accused 16.12.1999 by SI Bhag Singh of P.S. Julkhan. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this recovery is not witnessed by any independent witness. He further submits that if this recovery was not to be witnessed by any independent witness, SI Bhag Singh should have taken him to a Magistrate so that authenticity to this recovery could be assured. He further submits that his search in the presence of a DSP was a ritual rather than compliance with the provisions of section 50 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 in its letter and spirit. He further submits that if the compliance of this section was intended in its true spirit, SI Bhag Singh should have taken him to a Magistrate. He further submits that he has been in jail since 16.12.99 and so far trial has not made any headway. Accused is entitled to speedy trial in view of the provisions of Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Article 21 of the Constitution of India assures speedy trial to an accused. If the prosecution cannot assure speedy trial to the accused, there will be violation of the fundamental right granted to him under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. He further submits that section 37 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 will yield to Article 21 of the Constitution of India as Constitution is the supreme law of the land.
(2.) LOOKING to all the facts and circumstances of the case, I think bail should be allowed to the petitioner. So, bail to him to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patiala. Petition allowed.