TARSEM LAL Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners counsel has raised four contentions:

(2.) He contends that due to non-compliance of the aforesaid provisions, the petitioner is entitled to bail. He further states that in this case, only 10 kg. of poppy husk is alleged to have been seized from the possession of the petitioner.

(3.) Learned Assistant Advocate General, Haryana, admitted that remand was granted by the Judicial Magistrate beyond 15 days but his contention is that the Magistrate is empowered to grant remand upto 90 days in these cases. He further contends that provisions of Section 50 of the Act are adhered to, as option was given to the petitioner, which he declined.