Dhammo Vs. State - Court Judgment

Excerpt:
narcotic drugs & psychotropic substances act, 1985 - section 37--bail-public witness not supporting the prosecution case--doubts about search and seizure--bail granted. - labour & services disability pension: [vikramajit sen, sanjiv khanna & s.l.bhayana,jj] army act (46 of 1950), section 192 & pension regulations for the army (1961), regulation. 173 claimant was on casual leave sustained injury which contributed to invalidation for military service claim for disability pension held, to claim disability pension by military personnel it requires to be established that the injury or fatality suffered by the concerned claimant bears a causal connection with military service. secondly, if this obligation exists so far as discharge from the armed force on the opinion of a medical board the obligation and responsibility a fortiori exists so far as injuries and fatalities suffered during casual leave are concerned. thirdly, as a natural corollary it is irrelevant whether the concerned personnel was on causal or annual leave at the time or at the place when and where the incident transpired. this is so because it is the causal connection which alone is relevant. fourthly, since travel to and fro the place of posting may not appear to everyone as an incident of military service, a specific provision has been incorporated in the pension regulations to bring such travel within the entitlement for disability pension if an injury is sustained in this duration. fifthly, it cannot be said that each and every injury sustained while availing of casual leave would entitle the victim to claim disability pension. sixthly, provisions treating casual leave as on duty would be relevant for deciding questions pertaining to pay or to the right of the authorities to curtail or cancel the leave. lastly, injury or death resulting from an activity not connected with military service would not justify and sustain a claim for disability pension. this is so regardless f whether the injury or death has occurred at the place of posting or during working hours. this is because attributability to military service is a factor which is required to be established. - 7,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court.j.b. goel, j.1. the petitioner is facing trial for an offence under section 21 of the narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances act, 1985, (for short the act). the prosecution case in brief is that insp. b.s. ahelawat of operation cell (south west distt), new delhi had received secret information on 19.12.1996 at about 7.00 a.m. that the accused-applicant was selling smack in front of her house. on the basis of this information, a raiding party was arranged. lady const. urmila devi and one public witness prem singh besides other police officials were joined. option was given under section 50 of the act. acp of the same cell was called and in the search made in his presence; 51 pudias containing 40 gms. of smack was recovered from the possession of the accused.2. learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the provisions of sections 50, 52 and 57 of the act have not been complied with, he also contends that cfsl form was not prepared and sent to the cfsl as deposed by moharrar malkhana (pw1); that the presence of the acp is doubtful as he has not signed the seizure memo or any other document; also that the public witness has not supported the prosecution case and his testimony completely demolishes the case. he has also cited some case law.3. whereas learned counsel for the state has contended that these questions could be gone into at final stage and at this stage, prima facie, no case is made out.4. i have considered the circumstances of the case, the contentions and the material placed on record. to avoid any prejudice to the parties, it will not be proper to go in detailed discussion. however, it is seen that the public witness has not supported the prosecution case which may create doubts in the case.5. in the facts and circumstances, in my view it is a fit case to admit the petitioner on bail. she is admitted to bail upon her executing a personal bond in the sum of rs.7,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court. this is subject to the condition that she will appear during trial and no adjournment shall he taken on her behalf without valid ground.6. trial court record be sent back forthwith.