The Madras High Court has answered this question in the affirmative and directed the release on bail of the respondents who were arrested for the companymission of offences under the N.D.P.S. Act in default of filing the companyplaint within that period.
Accordingly, the accused claimed to be released on bail as of right on expiry of the specified period of 90 days and they have been directed to be released on bail on that ground alone.
Admittedly, the companyplaint against the accused was number filed within the maximum period of 90 days of the arrest specified in the proviso to sub section 2 of Section 167 Cr.
P.C. as the total period for which the accused can be remanded to custody during investigation.
On the bask of information, the premises of the accused Armukham, Nagraj and Arif U. Patel were searched at Madras and their statements recorded by the companycerned authorities.
These accused were arrested on 27.6.1994 and produced before the Magistrate who granted remand from time to time.
The material facts are only a few.
We need number mention the facts relating to the orders of preventive detention of the accused under the Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs Psychotropic Substances Act, 1988 since that is the subject matter of a different proceeding wherein the order of preventive detention was challenged.
Hence these appeals by special leave.
Admittedly, the Narcotics Control Bureau got a tip off that a companysignment of flasks exported from Madras to Israel companytained Hashish companycealed therein and pursuant to this tip of the companysignment was seized at Israel on 8.6.1994.
