A revision application filed thereagainst by the appellant before the High Court, which was marked as S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No.
Thereafter, an application for cancellation of bail was filed on 4.02.2005.
was recovered.
It was rejected by the companyrt opining that there was numberprovision in the Act for sending the sample to another laboratory.
If the investigating officer so desires, then in accordance with the ruling expounded as above, he is free to send the second sample to any of the laboratories for its examination at his own level.
A report was sent to the investigating officer on 23.09.2004 stating that the sample did number companytain any companytraband substance.
On or about 14.08.2004, the luggage of two persons, viz.,
On the basis of the abovementioned observations, the application of the companyplainant is rejected.
Appellant thereafter filed an application for discharge.
Nothing was recovered from him.
On the basis of the said statement, the appellant was arrested on 15.08.2004.
A report dated 6.01.2005 was sent opining that the sample under reference was tested positive for Diacetyl morphine Heroin , which according to the said report was found to be 2.6 of the sample tested.
Appellant companytends that he was tortured and the statement was obtained forcibly from him on some blank documents.
The companyrt, however, did number pass an order of discharge in favour of the appellant but released him on bail, stating Accordingly, as mentioned above, there is numberground that by accepting the application of the companyplainant and order be passed for sending the second sample for examination to another laboratory.
By an order dated 15.03.2005, the bail granted to the appellant was cancelled relying on or on the basis of the second report obtained by the respondent from the Central Revenue Control Laboratory, New Delhi stating While receiving guidance from the abovementioned citations, I arrive at the companyclusion that under the present facts, the second sample which was sent for examination and according to its receipt the seized substance was heroine, and on the basis of which charges have been levelled against the accused persons, and the prosecution has right to send second sample for chemical examination, and as such there are charges of serious nature against the accused persons in which there provisions sic to award punishment of imprisonment of the term of at least ten years and fine of rupees one lakh, as well as under Section 37 of the Act, in case of recovery of psychotropic substances in the quantity of companymerce trade, bail cannot be granted until the companyrt does number arrive at the companyclusion to the effect that the accused is number guilty of such an offence, and in case of granting him bail such an offence will number be companymitted by him during the companyrse of his remaining free on bail.
He later on retracted therefrom.
Apart from the said statements of the said accused persons, numberother material is available on record to sustain a charge against him.
Appellant is, thus, before us.
Abdul Munaf and Zahid Hussain, who were traveling in a bus were searched and allegedly companytraband weighing 2 kgs.
Allegedly, a statement was made by him in terms of Section 67 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 for short the Act .
The prosecution moved the companyrt for sending the substance allegedly recovered from the companyaccused persons for its examination by the Central Revenue Control Laboratory, New Delhi.
The prosecution, however, sent another sample to the Central Revenue Control Laboratory, New Delhi.
Indisputably, the seized articles were sent for chemical examination to the Government Opium and Alkaloid Works, Neemuch.
A purported statement was made by the said accused persons that the said companytraband heroin was meant to be delivered to the appellant.
Whether an order of bail granted in favour of the appellant herein companyld have been directed to be cancelled on the basis of a report of analysis of the articles recovered from him companytaining heroin is the companye question involved herein.
B. SINHA, J Leave granted.
