Judgment

Shah, J.—Leave granted.

2. As respondent No. 1 has not engaged any counsel, the Registry was directed to appoint an advocate as amicus curiae. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties. Only question involved in this appeal is whether the order passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allaha­bad, Lucknow Bench, granting bail to the respondent No. 1 Ram Samujh Yadav requires to be set aside on the ground that the High Court ignored the provisions of Section 37 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psycho­tropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as “NDPS Act”) as well as the law laid down by this Court.

3. It is alleged by the prosecution that on 21st May, 1997, a raid by the authorities of the Narcotic Department was carried out at the tubewell house of Respondent No. 1 and 5 Kg. of Opium was recovered. The Sessions Judge by the detail reasoned order dated 11th July, 1997 rejected the bail application after hearing Special Public Prosecutor (Narcotics) and considering the material on record.

4. The High Court granted bail by a cryptic order dated 20th August, 1998 which is extracted below :–

“The applicant is in jail since 22.5.1997 and trial has not concluded.

A