K. Jagannatha Shetty, J. - (1.) The petitioners were released on bail by the Enquiry Magistrate under proviso (a) to Section 167(2) of the Criminal P.C. After filing of the charge-sheet the High Court ordered their re-arrest by cancelling the ball. The order of the High Court is now under challenge.
(2.) I do not find any merit in these petitions. But before dismissing, I wish, however, to draw attention to some aspects of the question raised.
(3.) The facts: On 23 March 1988 the petitioners were arrested in Bombay by officers of the Narcotic Control Bureau. They were ordered to be produced before the competent Magistrate at New Delhi. They were accordingly produced before the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, New Delhi. On 29 March 1988 they were remanded to jail custody. till 12 April 1988. The remand order was subsequently renewed from time to time. On 10 May 1988 the petitioners moved the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate for bail. When that petition was pending consideration, the prosecution submitted charge-sheet. The charge-sheet was filed on 23 June 1988 for offences under Ss. 21, 23 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. On July 22, 1988 the petitioners filed an application for bail under Section 167(2) Cr. P.C. on the ground that the charge-sheet was filed after the expiry of 90 days of their arrest. On 29 July 1988 learned Magistrate enlarged them on bail on their furnishing self Bonds in the sum of Rupees two lakhs each with two surety bonds in the sum of Rs. 1 lakh each.;