ORDER

1. Delay condoned.

2. Leave granted.

3. These appeals are directed against the orders dated 11-9-2003 and b 25-9-2003, passed by the Delhi High Court, suspending the conviction during the pendency of the appeal.

4. The respondents were convicted under Section 29 read with Section 20(b)(ii)(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, (the NDPS Act) and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and a fine of Rs 1000. On appeals being filed, the learned Judge suspended the sentence and the respondents were enlarged on bail on executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs 50,000 with one surety for the like amount, to the satisfaction of the trial court. We have perused the order passed by the learned Judge and we find that there is not even a whisper about the condition contained in Section 37 of the NDPS Act with regard to enlarging of the accused on bail. Mr Jaspal Singh, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondents contended that the learned Public Prosecutor did not oppose the bail as contained in Section 37(1)(b)(ii) of the NDPS Act. According to him, unless the Public Prosecutor opposes the bail application, Section 37 will not apply. Mr Singh