The main legal point established is the stringent requirement of reasonable grounds for believing that the accused is not guilty of the alleged offence and is not likely to commit any offence while on bail, as mandated by Section 37 of the NDPS act.

JUDGMENT

Subramonium Prasad, J. - This petition has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. seeking bail in FIR No. 368/2020 dated 24.10.2020 registered at P.S. Timarpur under Sections 20/25/29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances act, 1985 (hereinafter, 'NDPS act').

2. The facts, in brief, leading up to the filing of both the petitions are as follows:

a) It is stated that information was received that one Ravi, Harbir and Sachin where supplying ganja in huge quantities at different places in Delhi and Uttar Pradesh by bringing it in from Malkangiri, Orissa. as per the information, on 24.10.2020, a supply of ganja would be brought between 5 to 6 P.M. in a white colour Mahindra Xylo driven by Harbir to Outer Ring Road from ISBT Kashmere Gate to Timarpur Nirmal Hirday near Wazirabad Flyover, Delhi.

b) It is stated that consequent to the secret information received, a raiding party was constituted and they reached at 4:35 P.M. at the Outer Ring Road Nirmal Hriday near Wazirabad Flyover, Delhi. at 5:00 P.M., a Mahindra Xylo car stopped on the road going to Timarpur and two boys emerged from the said vehicle. after looking around, the two boys re-entered the vehicle. It was noticed by the police officials that a person was sitting on the driver's seat and on the seat beside him, a white coloured sacked was kept.

c) at this juncture, it is stated that the two persons were confined by the raiding party and it was found that the person sitting at the driver's seat was Harveer Giri and the person sitting at the back seat was one Ravi Thakur (the Petitioner herein). Both the apprehended persons were read their rights and they recorded their refusal for getting searched by a Gazetted Officer or a Magistrate under Section 50 of the NDPS act.

d) Both Harveer Giri and Ravi Thakur (Petitioner herein) were searched and nothing was recovered from them. The white-coloured sack was retrieved from the car and another white-coloured heavy sack was found from the car. When these sacks were checked, total ten packets wrapped with khaki brown cello tape were found and they contained a stinky, damp green substance, which turned out to be ganja. The total weight of all the ten packets was 51.154 kg.

e) Consequently, the instant FIR was registered alleging that Harveer Giri and the Petitioner herein, in connivance with each other, intended to supply a total of 51.154 kg worth of ganja and had, therefore, committed offences under Sections 20/25/29 of the NDPS act.

f) The Petitioner herein was arrested on 25.10.2020 and had filed a bail application which was dismissed by the Ld. Sessions Judge vide Order dated 28.11.2020. Chargesheet under Sections 20/29 of the NDPS act was filed on 05.02.2021 against the Petitioner herein.

3. Mr. Nikhil Tyagi, the learned Counsel for the Petitioner, submits that the Petitioner herein has been falsely implicated in the instant matter and has never had anything to do with the selling of drugs. He submits that the date of the arrest of the Petitioner has been incorrectly indicated in the official records and that he was arrested one day prior to the incident as a result of which he was not produced before the Ld. Magistrate within 24 hours of being arrested.

4. The learned Counsel for the Petitioner argues that the requirements as provided under Section 50 of the NDPS act have not been fulfilled by the State and that as a result, the instant case against the Petitioner stands vitiated. He states that any recovery from the person or the car/house of the accused requires Section 50 of the NDPS act to be complied with. He further states that a perusal of the CDR provided with the chargesheet reveals that the CDR is only available till 22.10.2020 and that the CDR post the said date has not been supplied. Mr. Tyagi submits that if the CDR of the Petitioner for the dates of 23.10.2020 and 24.10.2020 are placed on record, it would reveal to this Court that the prosecution's version of the Petitioner being caught on 24.10.202