MUKHTIAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short 'the Code') seeking bail pending trial in case FIR No. 282 dated 10th July, 1995, registered at Police Station, Shahabad, under Section 18 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act (herein short 'the Act'). The petitioner was apprehended on 10th July, 1995 and as a result of his search opium weighing 400 grams was recovered from him.

(2.) Mr. Virk, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that in the present case, there is violation of Section 50 of the Act in as much as the option to be searched before the Magistrate was not given to the petitioner. He further submits that there is also violation of clause (b) of sub-section (i) of Section 36-A of the Act inasmuch as the remand of the petitioner was granted by the Illaqa Magistrate for the period exceeding 15 days. He further submits that the last remand order was passed on 25th August, 1995 and the remand was granted upto 4th September, 1995. In support of this submission he has placed reliance on two decisions of this Court in Bhupinder Singh v. State of Haryana, 1994 2 RCR(Cri) 302 and Nek Singh v. State of Haryana,1995 2 RCR(Cri) 12, Crl. Misc. No.4697-M of 1995 decided on 15th May, 1995.

(3.) I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. Keeping in view the alleged violation of Section 50 of the Act and also the alleged violation of sub-clause (b) of sub-section (i) of Section 36-A of the Act and also the quantity of the opium alleged to have been recovered from the petitioner, I am of the view that it is a fit case for grant of bail. Accordingly, I direct that the petitioner be admitted to bail on furnishing bail bound in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kurukshetra. The observations given by me hereinabove shall not have any bearing on the merits of the case. Dasti.