DARBARA SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has been arrested in connection with FIR No. 134 dated 3.7.1996 under Section 17 of the N.D.P.S. Act (for short the Act) and has given this application for bail.

(2.) I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner amongst other arguments, argued that the police officer who recorded the FIR, has carried out the investigation and, therefore, the petitioner be released on bail. The fact, in the contention stated above, is not under challenge. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied on Megha Singh v. State of Haryana, AIR 1995 S.C. 2339 and a judgment of single Bench of this Court in Risala v. State of Haryana, 1996(2) Recent C.R. 707 : [1996(2) All India Criminal Law Reporter 267 (Pb. and Hry.)]. Looking to the principle of above cited two judgments, the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner can be accepted.