Crl. Misc. No.M-23244 of 2010 ::1:: IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 24.09.2010 1) Crl. Misc. No.M-23244 of 2010 Amrinder Singh .. Petitioner Versus State of Punjab .. Respondent 2) Crl. Misc. No.M-24252 of 2010 Gurvinder Singh alias Gurshinder Singh .. Petitioner Versus State of Punjab .. Respondent Present:- Mr.Parminder Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.T.S.Salana, DAG, Punjab. * * * * S.S. SARON, J. This order will dispose of Criminal Miscellaneous No.M- 23244 of 2010 filed by Amrinder Singh son of Harbhajan Singh and Criminal Miscellaneous No.M-24252 of 2010 filed by Gurvinder Singh alias Gurshinder Singh son of Harbhajan Singh. The petitioners seek regular bail in a case registered against them on 25.04.2010 under the NDPS Act. The FIR in the case has been registered on the basis of memo (ruka) sent by Satpal Singh Inspector, Incharge CIA Staff, Faridkot. Satpal Singh-Inspector along with other police officials were patrolling and checking persons of suspicious nature. They had proceeded on metalled road from village Pakhi Kalan, towards Malewala. When the police party reached the Bridge on the storm water drain in the area of Pakhi Kalan at about 4.00 p.m. they saw two Crl. Misc. No.M-23244 of 2010 ::2:: persons sitting on the left side along the embankment of the storm water drain. In front of them one plastic bag was lying. On seeing the Police Party, they tried to run away but were apprehended. They disclosed their names as Amrinder Singh (petitioner in Criminal Miscellaneous No.M- 23244 of 2010) and Gurvinder Singh (petitioner in Criminal Miscellaneous No.M-24252 of 2010). The plastic bag was searched in the presence of Sh.Baljeet Singh, Deputy Superintendent of Police, posted at Faridkot. It was found to contain 5 Kgs. of opium. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that as per report (Annexure P-2) of the Chemical Analysis 4.48% Morphine was found in the sample of opium that was taken from the recovered contraband. Therefore, it is submitted that in the recovered contraband the actual content of the narcortic substance when calculated on the percentage of the contents is less than the commercial quantity. Reliance is placed on the case of E. Micheal Raj v. Intelligence Officer, Narcortic Control Bureau, 2008 (2) RCR (Criminal) 597, wherein it has been held by the Supreme Court that the quantity of the content of narcotic substance is relevant for determining whether it constitutes small quantity or commercial quantity and the entire substance cannot be ruled as a narcotic drug. In response, learned State Counsel for the State submits that the petitioners were apprehended with 5 Kgs of opium and they are not entitled to concession of bail in view of the recovery effected. However, it is accepted that there is no other case registered against them. After giving my thoughtful consideration to the matter, it may be noticed that the recovered contraband is 5 Kgs of opium. However, the quantity of narcotic content which is morphine is 4.48%, and, therefore, the recovery of narcotic substance works out to 224 Grams in the entire content. The commercial quantity in respect of opium is 2.5 Kg., in terms of Item No.92 of the Notification dated 16.07.1996 specifying small quantity Crl. Misc. No.M-23244 of 2010 ::3:: and commercial quantity. In E. Micheal Raj v. Intelligence Officer, Narcotic Control Bureau (supra) it was held that the entire substance of the contraband that is recovered cannot be viewed as narcotic drug and it is the quantity of the content of narcotic substance which is relevant for determining whether it constitutes small quantity or commercial quantity. The quantity in the present case is more than small quantity but less than commercial quantity. Therefore, in any case, it is not commercial quantity. Besides, there is no other case pending against the petitioner. The prosecution is to establish its case on the basis of evidence. The trial in the case is likely to take time. Accordingly, the petitioners on his furnishing personal bond and surety to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Faridkot, shall be admitted to bail. However, nothing observed or stated in the order shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case and the learned trial Court shall consider the matter on the basis of evidence and material as advanced in the case. Criminal Miscellaneous Petitions stand disposed of. September 24, 2010 (S.S. SARON) sukhpreet JUDGE