IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.39283 of 2009 HARENDRA PRASAD SAH @ HARENDRA PRASAD Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2 6.1.2010. Heard. The case has been registered under Sections 20, 22 of the N.D.P.S.Act. The prayer is for anticipatory bail. The facts are that two persons were going by a Motor-cycle, out of whom one fell down. The Police caught him and on search he was found possessing Charas. The man who was driving the Motor-cycle sped away. The apprehended person pointed out that the person who sped away is none other than his father and both were going to Gopalganj to sell the contraband Charas. Contentions have been many fold that with the consent of the child, he was searched by the Police and not by a Magistrate and as such search and seizure was falling foul of Section 50 of N.D.P.S. Act. Other contention is that on search of the house of the petitioner nothing was recovered as has been stated by the seizure witnesses and further that the petitioner is suffering from many serious ailments and as such deserves to be enlarged on anticipatory bail. Search by a Magistrate under Section 50 of the N.D.P.S. Act could be mandatory only when there is prior information that there are contraband articles and not on accidental recovery of any such substances. This appears 2 amply clear from Section 42 of N.D.P.S. Act. The person who sped away with the motorcycle is the petitioner. In the facts and circumstances, prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is dismissed. SKBOSE (Dharnidhar Jha)