A licensed dealer's presumption of innocence remains until proven guilty, and violations of procedural rights can merit bail even with substantial allegations.

JUDGMENT :

ARUN MONGA, J.

1. Claiming himself to be falsely implicated, the applicant herein, a licensee under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 and carrying out the business of drugs and medicines (scheduled under NDPS Act), is before this Court seeking bail for alleged offences committed under Sections 21, 22, 29 and 30 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 ('NDPS Act'), for which a case has been registered by Central Bureau of Narcotics of Delhi bearing No.PDI/DEL/Seizure/4/2024.

2. Succinct facts as pleaded in the bail application are as follows: On 13.02.2024, a team of inspectors from the Central Bureau of Narcotics(CBN), New Delhi, conducted a search at the premises of M/s Vin Healthcare in the absence of the applicant. A personal search of all individuals present yielded no incriminating material. The team then inspected the stock of NDPS medicines and found discrepancies between the recorded stock and the actual inventory.

2.1. In light of these discrepancies, the applicant was informed of his rights under Section 50 of the NDPS Act. He gave written consent for a search. A detailed search of the premises led to the seizure of various NDPS drugs, which were sealed, labelled, and documented in the seizure memo. Separate lists were prepared for retail and wholesale stock, both showing significant mismatches. Two hard drives containing stock records were also seized from the shop's computers.

2.2. Next day, on 14.02.2024, at approximately 18:00 hours, the applicant was arrested after being informed of the reasons for his arrest i.e. mismatch in the inventory. A personal search memo was prepared, and the arrest was formally recorded. The arrest documents were submitted to the Superintendent of the CBN at 20:00 hours the same day. Summons under Section 67 of the NDPS Act were also issued for his examination.

2.3. The investigation allegedly revealed substantial discrepancies between the stock records submitted by the applicant and the actual quantities of NDPS medicines found. Criminal complaint was filed before the competent court and the trial is pending at Patiala House, New Delhi, at the stage of miscellaneous appearance. Learned Trail court has taken cognizance under Section 22 of the NDPS Act vide an order dated 29.10.2024.

3. The stand taken by the prosecution/Central Bureau of Narcotics is that, the officers of Central Bureau of Narcotics recovered and seized 12592 Fentanyl Injections, 2353 Fentanyl Patches, 4540 Morphine Sulphate injections, 16510 Morphine Sulphate Tablets, 610 Diazepam Injections, 8080 Pentazocine Injections, 3820 Tramadol Injections, 675 Ketamine Injections, 226 Buprenorphine patches, 800 Buprenorphine tablets, 325 Midazolam injections, 1250 Remifentanil Injections and 50 Pethidine injections from the premises, vide panchnama dated 13.02.2024 under the provisions of NDPS Act, 1985.

3.1. In his voluntary statement dated 14.02.2024 tendered under Section 67 of the NDPS Act, the applicant inter-alia corroborated the above said recoveries and other incriminating facts. Moreover, the applicant accepted to have supplied NDPS medicines to the illicit market by creating fake demand drafts, medical prescriptions and invoices/bills. He was thus arrested and was explained the grounds of his arrest.

4. The applicant filed the regular bail application before Special Judge, (NDPS) Patiala House Court, New Delhi and the same was dismissed vide order dated 06.09.2024.

5. In the aforesaid backdrop, I have heard the rival contentions and perused the case file.

6. Bail applicati