JAGJIT SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD . According to the prosecution case 20 grams of smack was recovered from the possession of the accused (petitioner) on 14.2.1998. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there has been non -compliance of the provisions of Section 50 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 inasmuch as offer alleged to have been made was that if he (petitioner) wanted, he could be searched in the presence of a Gazetted Police Officer or a Magistrate. Learned counsel submits that this amounts to circumventing the provisions of Section 50 ibid and not allowing them to come in full play and the offer made would be a partial offer not conducing to the provisions of Section 50 ibid. In support of this submission, he has drawn my attention to Jodha Singh v. State of Punjab, 1998 (2) RCR (Criminal) 507, where it was held that Investigating Officer is bound to comply with the mandatory provisions of Section 50 and the offer given by the Investigating Officer for searching the accused before a Magistrate or a Gazetted Officer is not a valid offer under Section 50 ibid.

(2.) LEARNED counsel further submits that if Deputy Superintendent of Police had been really present at the time of recovery, he would have figured on personal search memo also. On personal search memo only ASI Amrik Singh and HC Bhupinder Singh figure. He figures only on the recovery memo. Learned counsel submits that no wonder his signatures were obtained there afterwards so that the act of Investigating Officer could be in tune with the wording of ruqa.

(3.) KEEPING in view what has been submitted above by the learned counsel for the petitioner. I deem it proper to allow bail to the petitioner. So, bail to the petitioner to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate, Amritsar. Appeal allowed.