MUKESH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties and also perused the material available on record.

(2.) The petitioner(s) has/have been arrested in FIR No. 42/2018 of Police Station Rathanjana, Distt. Pratapgarh for the offence(s) punishable under Sec. (s) 8/15 and 8/18 of the NDPS Act. He/she/they has/have preferred this/these bail application(s) under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that as per the prosecution story, 1 kgs 400 gms of opium and 67 kgs of poppy straw were recovered from the petitioner on 3/5/2018. It is submitted that opium recovered from the petitioner is below commercial quantity and from the said opium, the police had taken out two samples of 50 gms each. It is further submitted that so far as the action of the Seizure Officer of taking samples from 67 kgs of poppy straw alleged to have been recovered from the petitioner is concerned, the procedure provided under law has not been adhered-to by the Seizure Officer. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that as per the prosecution story, the said poppy straw was packed in five separate packets, however, the Seizure Officer has not taken out samples from each bag and has simply taken out 200 gms of poppy straw from each bag and then mixed the same. It is submitted that this Court in Netram v. State of Rajasthan, reported in 2014(1) Cr.L.R. (Raj.) 163 has held that samples from each bag have to be taken. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the statement of Bhagwan Lal (PW-5), in which, he has specifically stated that he did not take out samples separately from each bag. It is, therefore, submitted that the opium recovered from the petitioner is below commercial quantity whereas, the samples taken out by the Seizure Officer are in violation of law laid down by this Court in Netram's case (supra).