ARUN KUMAR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD . According to the prosecution, 70 grams of charas was recovered from the possession of the petitioner on 3.3.1998. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that according to the prosecution, one Sarwan Kumar was with the police party, but if Sarwan Kumar had really been with the police party at the time of recovery, seal after use would have been handed over to him. Instead, it was handed over to constable Bachitter Singh. He further submits that the offer allegedly made to the accused was not in full compliance of the provisions of Section 50 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. Offer alleged to have been made was whether he wanted his search to be effected in the presence of a Gazetted Police Officer or a Magistrate. Offer made should have been that if he wanted, he could be taken to a gazetted officer or a magistrate for search so that he could have opted that he be searched in the presence of a Magistrate. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that no wonder offer was not made at all as the attestation of recovery memo by the independent witness is in doubt.

(2.) WITHOUT going into the merits of these submissions I deem it proper to allow bail to the petitioner. So, bail to him to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. Petition allowed.