VIJENDRA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned public prosecutor and perused the first information report and the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Jhunjhunu Challan has been filed in this case on 12.4.91.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that there has been a non-compliance of the provisions of Sections 42, 50 and 57 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the NDPS Act). He urges that the petitioner is a boy of 17 years.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the decisions of this Court in Imamuddin Vs. State of Raj. 1986 (2) R.L.R. 63 and Goverdhan Lal Vs. State (1991 RCC 168) . The learned public prosecutor has admitted that there has been a non-compliance of provisions of Sec. 50 of the NDPS Act. In view of the above position & in the facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to grant bail to the accused petitioner.