STATE OF H P Vs. DILE RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS criminal revision petition has been filed by the State, against the order dated 14. 9. 2007, passed by the learned Special Judge, Mandi, whereby the respondent Dile Ram was enlarged on bail, in FIR No. 4 of 2007, registered in police station Aut, under Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic substances Act, 1985, in short the 'act' against the respondent for, allegedly having found in his possession 1 kgs 500 grams of charas.

(2.) WHILE granting the bail the learned special Judge applied the ratio laid down by the Division Bench of this Court in dharam Pal v. State of H. P. 1 holding that it is the quantity of resin which is to be taken while considering the question of "small" or "commercial quantity". Since the resin was found 35. 63% W/w in the sample sent for examination, as per the report of Forensic science Laboratory, therefore, the quantity, which was recovered from the respondent did not fall within the purview of the "commercial quantity'.

(3.) SHRI J. S. Guleria, learned Law Officer has vehemently argued that the quantity which was recovered from the possession of the respondent is a "commercial quantity" and the rigor of Section 37 of the Act would apply to this case. Since the learned special Judge ignored the said provisions, as such, his order enlarging the respondent on bail is illegal. Contra, Shri Anup Chitkara, learned counsel for the respondent has disputed the maintainability of this petition on the ground that the order for granting the bail is an "interlocutory order" and it is not revisable. It is further contended that the learned Special Judge has rightly applied the ratio of Dharam Pal's case supra, and held that the rigour of Section 37 of the narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic substances, Act does not apply to the case. Thus the order for the grant of bail is perfectly correct.