Manoj Singh Vs. State

the case questioned whether the accused was entitled to the bail where there was non-compliance of section 55 of the narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances act, 1985, - it was found that no proof had been adduced regarding the deposition of the central forensic science laboratory form in malkhana as per section 161 of the criminal procedure code, 1973 - on the basis of the facts and circumstances, it was held that the accused was entitled to grant the bail - - 7,000.00 with one surety for the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court any observations made herein will have no bearing on the trial of the case.r.l. gupta, j.(1) petitioner is facing prosecution u/section 18 of the ndps act for being found in possession of 206 gms. of opium 'on 16.1.1992.he applies for bail.(2) i have heard arguments advanced by the learned counsel for theparties. the most glaring fact which appears to me to be lacking in this case is that there is no mention about the deposit of cfsl form in the malkhana.learned counsel for the petitioner also says that the constable who took the sample to cfsl and whose name is laxmi narain has not said in him statement u/section 161 criminal procedure code that he deposited cfsl form in the malkhana. another fact which weighs in my mind at this stage is that the article recovered is not of a very high value. other points also have been argued but i do not consider it necessary to discuss those points.(3) taking the totality of the circumstances into consideration. i am of the view that there seems to be some lacuna in the prosecution case,prima fade. the petitioner is, thereforee, granted bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of rs. 7,000.00 with one surety for the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court any observations made herein will have no bearing on the trial of the case.(4) petitioner be informed accordingly through superintendent, jail.