CHANDRA SEN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is second bail application under S. 439 Cr. P.C. in a case under S. 17/20 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substance Act- The petitioner along with Bhanwar Singh had moved an application which was dismissed by me on 2 5 88 on the ground that against Bhanwar Singh there was already a case pending and the father of the present petitioner was also involved in one of the similar cases. This application has been filed stating that the ground for rejection no more exists as the father of the petitioner, namely, Lalsingh has been acquitted since after then in the case pending against him by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Beawar vide his judgment dated May 30. 1988. hence it is submitted that the petitioner may now be released on bail particularly keeping in view that he is behind the bar since Jan. 3, 1988, and the trial of the case has not yet started. Besides this he is not involved in any other case. This case came up before me on July 18, 1988. Earlier to this two mote cases under NDPS, Act came before me in last 10 days and I did not pass any order in any case till date as I wanted to peruse the provisions of Narcotic Durgs and Psychotropic Substance Ordinance promulgated by the President of India on July 1, 1988. Several opportunities were given to General and the Government Advocate who had come to my court for different cases. Everybody assured me of bringing the copy of the orders but the same has net been produced before me till date. I asked the learned counsel for the petitioner to go to the Narcotic Department and obtain the copy of the Ordinance, but to my surprise it was reported that they too do not possess the copy of the Ordinance. Nothing can be more unfortunate than such a situation where despite the fact that more than a forth night has elapsed that the copy of the Ordinance is not available with the State of Rajasthan or the Narcotion Department. Thus till date except the statement of Mr. B.B. Kumar, Director General Narcotions Control Bureau published in the press about the contemplation of still more heavy punishments and tightening the procedure was mentioned no material is available. I can only bemoan and say that it behoves those who are in-charge of maintenance of law and order in the State to make themselves aware of the provisions of the Ordinance on the very day the same are promulgated It should be remembered that when the President of India passes an Ordinance it is presumed to be an extraordinary circumstance where the normal procedure of presenting the Bill before the House is not followed. I can only hope and wish that the State of Rajasthan shall create a cell if it has none to keep itself upto date and tone up the respective departments accordingly.

(2.) Be that as it may, in the instant case due to the change in circumstances that the father of the accused has been acquitted in the earlier case and that no other case is pending against him and further that be is in jail for last more than six months and trial has not yet started, I deem it proper to enlarge him on bail.

(3.) Accordingly this bail application is allowed. The petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail if he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs 20,000.00with two sureties in the sum of Rs. 10,000/ each to the satisfaction of the trial court with stipulation to appear in that court, as and when called upon to do so during the pendency of the trial against him. If the accused is found involved in any other case of the similar nature this order of bail shall stand cancelled. It shall also be open to the Public Prosecutor to move for cancellation of bail before the trial court concerned and it would be open to the trial court to cancel the bail without reference to this court if accused repeats the offence. Copy of this order shall be forwarded to the Home Commissioner, Government of Rajasthan General, Narcotic Control Bureau, Government of India, New Delhi. Application allowed.