1. In all these 3 petitions filed under Section 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 since the petitioners are seeking the relief of bail in connection with case in Crime No.242 of 2011 of Manipal Police Station registered for the offences punishable under Section 8 and 20(b)(ii)(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, “the NDPS Act”), they were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.

2. The petitioner in Cri.P.Nos.1223 and 1224 of 2012 is one and the same. He has been arrayed as accused 2. The petitioner in Crl.P.No.1627 of 2012 has been arrayed as accused 1. These petitioners along with others are accused of having possessed brown sugar weighing about 1 kg. valued at Rs.1,65,00,000/-.

3. According to the case of the prosecution, at about 8.15 p.m. on 4-11-2011, P.M. Diwakar, Police Sub-Inspector of Coastal Police Station, Malpe received a credible information about few persons selling and buying brown sugar near Paradise Resort situated close to Malpe Beach; immediately, he secured the presence of panchas, apprised than about the information received, thereafter along with panchas and the staff, proceeded to the place; while they were waiting near the Causality section of KMC Hospital, Manipal at about 10.15 p.m. they saw a rickshaw being parked; at about 10.30 p.m. car bearing registration No.KA-04-MD-4115 came there with four persons and at the same time two persons came there on a motor cycle bearing registration No.KA-20-B-8411; when all of them were discussing and exchanging some articles, the police raiding party surrounded them. However, out of them few ran away while others were apprehended and they were found in possession of brown sugar, which was seized later. The petitioners herein along with others, were apprehended and brought to the Police Station. Subsequently, the case was transferred to Manipal Police Station on the point of jurisdiction. Since the Investigation Officer did not file final report within 90 days, accused 2 filed petition under Section 167(2) of the Cr.P.C. seeking relief of bail while accused 1 filed application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking relief of bail. The learned Special Judge rejected both the petitions and also made certain observations in the course of the order as to the manner in which the investigation has been committed. It is not necessary for me to refer to those observations nor it is necessary for this Court to make any further observations thereon.

4. After the rejection of their petitions by the learned Special Judge, the petitioners have presented these petitions. Accused 2 has alternatively also has filed application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. before this Court seeking bail on merits. All these petitions have been opposed by the respondent-State. I have heard both sides. Perused the records made available.

5. At this stage, it is submitted that the sample said to have been drawn from the substance stated to have been seized from the possession of the accused persons was sent to FSL, Bangalore for chemical analysis and the chemical analysis report submitted by the FSL was in the negative. However, learned State Public Prosecutor submitted that in order to obtain a second opinion having regard to the peculiar circumstance, steps are being taken to send samples to the Truth Lab, Bangalore and the report from the said Lab is awaited.

6. The application under Section 167(2) of Cr.P.C. filed by accused 2 was rejected on the ground that under Section 36-A(4) of the NDPS Act, the period of 90 days occurring under Section 167(2) of Cr.P.C. is extended to 180 days in respect of the offences punishable under Sections 19, 24 or 27-A of NDPS Act, involving commercial quantity, and the quantity said to have been seized from the possession of the accused persons was falling within the commercial quantity. However, it is the contention of the petitioner-accused 2 that as per the law laid down by the Apex Cou