ORDER :

The applicants have been arrested in connection with Crime No.05/2019 registered at Police Station – Farasgaon, District – Kondagaon (C.G.) for alleged commission of offences under Section 20 (b) (ii) (c) of NDPS Act, 1985.

2. Prosecution case is that upon receipt of information, when police intercepted the applicants, they were found in possession of 106.964 Kgs of ganja and according to the prosecution, the applicants failed to produce any valid authority of possession.

3. Learned counsel for the applicants would submit that the mandate of Section 42, 50 and 55 of NDPS Act have not been complied with in its true spirit while drawing proceedings under the Act. The submission is that while sending information regarding receipt of information of illegal transportation of ganja, no specific reason was assigned as to what was the urgency to proceed without obtaining warrant. It is further submitted that there are discrepancies in the sample of the seal alleged to have been fixed on the seized articles because the sample seal as was used to seal the contraband and the sample seal which has been used while preparing inventory by the Executive Magistrate are differently shaped. He would also submit that recovery of ganja is said to have been made from the vehicle and not from the personal search but as notice was given under Section 50 of the NDPS Act, provisions of the said Act would become applicable and violation of its mandate would invalidate the entire proceedings because there is nothing to show that the concerned police officer made any effort to take the accused before the gazetted officer or Magistrate irrespective of whether the accused expressed their willingness. Last, but not the least, learned counsel for the applicant would argue that in the present case, the applicants have remained in jail for more than two years but till date, trial has not been concluded. He would argue that as there is inordinate delay in conclusion of trial, irrespective of the bar created under Section 37 of NDPS Act, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail on the ground of violation of constitutionally guaranteed right under Article 21 of the Constitution of India of speedy trial which has been violated. In support of the aforesaid submission, learned counsel for the applicant has placed reliance upon Division Bench judgment of the High Court of Calcutta in the case of In Re: Sanawar Ali v. Union of India reported in AIR online 2020 CAL 561.

4. On the other hand, learned State counsel would submit that the proceedings, right from recording satisfaction and sending information under Section 42 of the NDPS Act upto registration of FIR have been drawn in substantial compliance of the provisions contained under NDPS Act. According to him, arguments of violation of Section 42 of NDPS Act is of technical nature because the officer, while sending information, also attached along with the information, the reasons why it was not possible to wait for warrant. He would next submit that the alleged ground of discrepancy of seal, does not in any manner, cast any doubt because the seal is of the same police station. He would submit that the proceedings which were drawn at the time of seizure of ganja, were affixed with samples and those samples were deposited in the malkhana. Later on, when the occasion arose for preparation of inventory before the Executive Magistrate, ganja was again taken out from the malkhana and it was produced before the Executive Magistrate, where inventory was prepared and it was re-sealed with the seal of the police station. Therefore, it cannot be said to be a case of violation of any of the provisions contained in the NDPS Act. Learned State counsel would further argue that in a case where ganja has not been recovered from the person but from the vehicle, proceedings could not be challenged on the ground of defective notice under Section 50 of the NDPS Act. On the aspect of delay in trial, learned State counsel woul