CAV Order

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput

1. Since all the above bail applications are arising out of the same crime number, there fore, they are being decided by this common order.

2. The applicants have been arrested in connection with Crime No.140/2022, registered at Police Station Khursipar, District Durg (CG) for offence punishable under Sections 22 (c), 27 (B), & 8 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short 'NDPS Act') as per impugned order. However charge sheet has been filed under section 22(c), 27A, 8 of the NDPS Act.

3. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 14.3.2022 police inspector of Police Station Khursipar, District Durg received a secret information through secret informant, acting upon which, he along with staff went to the place of incident and conducted search and seizure near Shyam Pharma in which the accused persons Rakesh Verma, Jaggu @ Jageshwar Nishad, Safaque Bano and other co-accused namely Ajay Agrawal were caught in possession of narcotic substance. From the possession of applicant - Rakesh Verma, total 24000 tablets of alprazolam and cash of Rs.400/- was seized, from the possession of applicant- Jaggu @ Jageshwar Nishad, 8640 capsules of spas trancan plus which contains tramadol and cash of Rs.600/- was seized, from the possession of applicant - Safaque Bano, total 9000 tables of alprazolam, 2016 capsules of spas tran- can plus which contains tramadol and Rs.3000/- was seized and from the possession of co-accused Ajay Agrawal, 11700 tablets of alprazolam was seized.

4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and they have not committed the aforesaid crime. It is submitted that during conduction of search and seizure, mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act have not been complied with. It is further submitted that co-accused Ajay Agrawal from whose possession 11700 tablets of alprazolam was seized has been granted bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court in M.Cr.C. No.3022/2022 vide order dated 10.5.2022.

5. Ms. Fouzia Mirza, learned Senior Counsel with Mr. Rahim Ubwani, learned counsel for applicant - Safaque Bano in M.Cr.C. No. 6951/2022, submits that applicant - Safaque Bano is in jail since 15.3.2022 and she is 20 years B.Sc. student and she is having no criminal antecedents. She further submits that applicant - Safaque Bano had gone to shop in search of job where a raid was conducted and she was not involved in the crime. She also submits that there is no evidence of Section 27A of the NDPS Act to connect the present applicant having involvement of sale of the narcotic drug. She submits that memorandum of co-accused Ajay Agrawal was recorded and names of co- accused Rakesh Verma and Nitin Simpi was mentioned along with one Suman Ratlani with whom bank transaction and payment of money with respect to alleged drugs sale and purchase has been done. In memorandum of co-accused Ajay Agrawal, name of the present applicant is not reflected and hence, it is evident that the present applicant has only gone for search of job in that shop and however she has been falsely impli- cated. She further submits that there is total non-compliance of Sections 42 and 42(2)

of the NDPS Act. In support of her argument, she relies upon the judgment of the Supreme Court Chunna alias Mehtab Vs. State of M.P.1 (para-2), State of Ra- jasthan Vs. Jagraj Singh alias Hansa2 (para-24) and Darshan Singh Vs. State of Haryana3 (para 8 and 13). She also submits that search notice panchnama under Sec- tion 50 of the NDPS Act of the applicant does not bear the signature of the applicant. Hence, there is total non-compliance of Section 50 of the NDPS Act. For this purpose, she relies upon the judgment of the Supreme Court reported in State of Punjab Vs. Baldev Singh4(paras-55 to 57). She submits that the applicant being lady and Section 50(4) of the NDPS Act requires that she should be searched by a female and search memo shows that she has been searched by the