B.A. PATIL, J.

1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner/ accused No. 1 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. to release him on bail in Crime No. 52/2018 (Spl. C.C. No. 860/2018) of Cantonment Police Station, Bengaluru, for the offence punishable under Section 20(b) of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, (hereinafter referred as NDPS Act for short).

2. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State.

3. The gist of the complaint is that the railway police officials based on the complaint of theft were on patrolling duty, at that time Howrah to Yeshwanthpur train arrived at about 8.05 a.m. at plat form No. 4, they saw one person carrying two luggage bags in a suspicious manner along with other passengers. Immediately they apprehended and enquired and he was unable to give proper answer and got enquired about his address and came to know that his name is Saula Nayak son of Lakshma Nayak aged about 48 years resident of Orissa. They inspected the said two bags, each packet was containing 2 Kgs. of ganja and when they made enquiries with the accused, he told that the same has been grown at his native place and he has cut the leaves, dried and packed in his house and brought to Bengaluru for the purpose of sale. Immediately, in the presence of panch witnesses they seized the bags by drawing the mahazar. On the basis of the complaint, a case has been registered.

4. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner/accused that no procedure of NDPS Act has been complied. He further submitted that the provisions of Sections 42, 50, 52A of NDPS Act have not been followed. He further submitted that as per the standing instructions No. 1.88 the quantitative test as well as qualitative test has to be complied with within the stipulated time and in the instant case on hand already charge sheet has been filed, till then they have not produced the quantitative test report and it has been produced today. It is mandatory requirement of the standing instructions that it has to be complied. If it is not complied, then the petitioner/accused is entitled to be released on bail. He further submitted by referring to the Certification of the Magistrate under Section 52A of the NDPS Act that already the samples have been taken and subsequently the packed samples with 50 grams have been certified, the said act of the Magistrate and the police is violative of Article 52A of NDPs Act. By relying upon the decision in the case of Union of India vs. Bal Mukund and Others, (2009) 12 SCC 161 submitted that the standing instructions if they are not followed the petitioner/accused is entitled to be released on bail. He is ready to abide by the conditions imposed by this Court and ready to offer the sureties. On these grounds he prayed to allow the petition and to release the petitioner on bail.

5. Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader vehemently argued and submitted that the provisions of Sections 42, 50, 52A of NDPS Act are not attracted to the present facts of the case on hand. She further submitted that already forensic test report has been reached to the court and all the articles are containing the ganja and the sample has given positive result. The petitioner/accused was carrying 24 Kgs. of ganja, which is more than the commercial quantity and as per Section 37 of the NDPS Act this Court cannot release the petitioner/accused on bail. She further submitted that the procedure has been followed while seizing the articles and no other grounds have been made out to release the petitioner/accused on bail. On these grounds she prayed to dismiss the petition.

6. I have carefully and cautiously gone through the contents of the complaint and the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the records.

7. The first and foremost submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner/accused is