Non-compliance of mandatory provisions like Sections 42 and 50 of the N.D.P.S. Act can be considered as a ground for bail if clear from the F.I.R. and not explained by the prosecution.

JUDGMENT

ORDER

1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode).

2. Heard Mr. S. Manohar, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner and Mr. P.C. Das, learned counsel appearing for the State. Perused the F.I.R., case diary, statement of the witnesses and other relevant documents placed before this Court for consideration.

3. The present bail application has been filed by the accusedpetitioner under Section 439, Cr.P.C. for his release on regular bail in connection with Mathili P.S. Case No.42 of 2021 dated 07.03.2021 corresponding to Special G.R. Case No.36 of 2021 pending in the court of leaned Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Malkangiri for commission of offence punishable under Section 20(b)(ii)(C) of the N.D.P.S. Act.

4. The prosecution case, in gist, is that on 07.03.2021 at about 12.35 A.M. on the main road of Govindpally Bus Stand, the police found two vehicles were coming in high speed from Malkangiri side. On suspicion, the police officials on duty intercepted the vehicles and stopped it. On search, it was found by the police party that four persons are sitting inside the vehicle bearing Registration No.HR-22- R- 4972. Similarly, the 2nd vehicle which was stopped is a Toyota Corolla vehicle bearing Registration No.HR-12-J-1000. From the 2nd vehicle also four persons were found sitting inside the vehicle. On further verification, police party found two plastic sacks in the 1st vehicle and three sacks in the 2nd vehicle which were loaded in the dicky of the above described cars. After opening the dicky of the vehicle for search police team present at the spot could found pungent smell of Ganja was coming out from the dicky of both cars. On interrogation by the police, passengers of both the vehicles confessed before the police that they were carrying ganja, which were kept in the plastic sacks and loaded in the dicky of the aforesaid two vehicles. They further confessed that the ganja, which was seized from the vehicles, were procured from Chitrokonda Swabhiman area and they were transporting the same in the above noted two vehicles. Upon seizure and measurement of the contraband articles, it was found that the said articles were being transported from the place of procurement to the place of destination by using the above noted two vehicles and further police team recovered a total contraband article weighing 137 Kgs. and 300 grams. Accordingly, the F.I.R. was lodged by one Siba Prasad Bhadra, S.I. of Mathili P.S. on 07.03.2021.

5. Mr. S. Manohar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 07.03.2021 and he further submits that the investigation of the case has been concluded in the meantime and charge-sheet has been filed. In course of his argument, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner laid much emphasis on non-compliance of mandatory provisions like Sections 42 and 50 of the N.D.P.S. Act. In the said context, learned counsel for the petitioner drew attention of this Court to the F.I.R. and submitted that with regard to compliance of Sections 42 and 50 of the N.D.P.S. Act, nothing has been mentioned in the F.I.R. Therefore, he contends that due to non-compliance of mandatory provisions like Sections 42 and 50 of the N.D.P.S. Act, the entire seizure is vitiated and further the accused petitioner is most likely to be acquitted in the trial on the aforesaid ground. He further contends that the F.I.R. was registered after delay of seven hours from the time when the vehicle was intercepted and contraband articles were seized.

6. In course of his argument, learned counsel for the petitioner tried to demonstrate the flaws/laches in the procedure adopted by the police party. By referring to various provisions of the N.D.P.S. Act, learned counsel for the petitioner tried to impress upon this Court that the procedure prescribed by law particularly with regard to compliance of mandatory provisions under Sections 42 and 50 of the N.D.P.S. Act have