AMRAT LAL ALIAS BHOLA Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ACCUSED Amrat Lal who as per annexure P-2 describing the issuance of licence to the competent person for sale of drugs under Category IV of the said licence, is shown as the sole proprietor of M/s. Aggarwal Medical, Tapa. From his possession 70 capsules of yellow and pink colour of DPPL and another 270 capsules have been recovered along with 1960 tablets of searl. Thus, he was arrested under the provisions of the NDPS Act by the Police Station Tapa vide FIR No. 11 dated 8.7.1996. The accused is in the police custody and the recovery has already been effected from his possession. He is seeking bail in the Court and through his counsel contends that he is innocent and is a licence holder. Being the licence holder, he was authorised to sell the medicines and therefore he was legally in possession of the Capsules and the Tablets recovered from his possession for which he has been illegally booked up for offence under the NDPS Act. Various legalities have been raised by the counsel for the petitioner. Even he had gone to the extent of saying that the petitioner at the best could be hauled up for the Cosmetic Act and in no manner has committed the offence within the ambit of any provisions of the NDPS Act.

(2.) THIS Court while deciding the bail application is not supposed to observe to the effect whether the accused could be arrested for an offence under the NDPS Act or under the Cosmetic Act. This is a matter which can be taken care of and can be discussed at the time of trial. This Court at the moment has to see whether the presence of the accused is required for the purposes of investigation and if he is released on bail, he can tamper with the prosecution evidence and can run away from the trial. The accused is the proprietor of the firm and some tablets have been recovered from him. On that score alone he would not leave his profession and is not supposed to run away from the trial of the case. The investigation in the matter has been completed and according to Mr. Grewal, only Chemical Analysis report is to be obtained by the police which will take some time. The very fact that the police did not obtain the report of the Chemical Examiner for such a long time will not come in the way of the accused for his release on bail.

(3.) HENCE , in the circumstances, the accused is directed to be released on bail in the amount of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety and personal recognition bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of CJM Sangrur. However, the petitioner shall not leave the territorial jurisdiction of the trial Court unless permission for that is granted to him by the Court.