IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No.M-19757 of 2009 Date of Decision : October 12, 2009 Jasvir Singh and another ... Petitioners versus State of Punjab ... Respondent Present: Mr. Ashok Giri, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Gourav Garg Dhuriwala, AAG Punjab L. N. Mittal, J. Jasvir Singh and Mangal Singh have filed this petition for bail in case FIR No. 50 dated 9.3.2009 under sections 18 of NDPS Act (in short, the Act) Police Station Nakodar, District Jalandhar. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case file. According to the prosecution version, 4 kgs of opium was recovered from each of the two petitioners. The quantity of contraband being commercial quantity qua each petitioner, the petitioners do not deserve the concession of bail in view of bar created by section 37 of the Act . Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that one Deputy Superintendent of Police was also present in the police party and therefore, section 50 of the Act was not complied with. The contention cannot be accepted because the petitioners were informed of their right to be searched Criminal Misc. No. M-19757 of 2009 -2- in the presence of a gazetted officer or magistrate but they declined the offer. Learned for the petitioners also contended that seal was not handed over to independent witness who was also present at the spot. However, merely on this ground, the prosecution case cannot be doubted at this stage of bail. Learned counsel for the petitioners also contended that samples were sent to Laboratory after delay of four days. The contention has no merit as the contraband was seized from the petitioners in the afternoon and the FIR was registered at 4.45 PM on 9.3.2009. There was holi festival on 11.3.2009 and hola festival on 12.3.2009 and the samples were sent to Laboratory on 13.3.2009. Consequently, it has not to be said that there is any delay much less undue delay in sending the samples to the Laboratory. In view of the aforesaid but without meaning to express any opinion on the merits, the petitioners do not deserve the concession of bail. Dismissed. ( L. N. Mittal ) October 12, 2009 Judge 'dalbir'