M.M.PUNCHHI, J. - (1.) THIS order shall dispose of Cr. M. Nos. 3832 -M and 5018 -M of 1986.
(2.) HARBANS Singh accused filed Cr. M. No. 3832 -M of 1986 seeking bail in a case under section 18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, for allegedly he was found in possession of 90 kilograms of poppy heads. The petition was moved on 19.6.1986 and on 20.6.1986, notice was issued to the Advocate General, Punjab. Thereafter, it appears that a petition was moved on 24.6.1986 before the Court of Session, Bhatinda without disclosing that the accused had already approached this Court for grant of bail and that the petition was pending. The Sessions Judge, Bhatinda on 26.6.1986 granted bail in the sum of Rs. 8,000/ - with one surety of the like amount.
(3.) ON 17.7.1986, it was brought to the notice of this Court that the accused had been granted bail. The State counsel was then directed to have a copy of the said order. Having obtained it, an application for cancellation of bail has been moved which is Cr. M. No. 5018 -M of 1986. It was the duty of the accused to have pointed out to the Court of Session and equally the duty of the Court of Session to have obtained before hand a certificate from the petitioner or his counsel that he had not moved the High Court for grant of bail. This step is essential for powers of Court of Session and that of the High Court are concurrent in the matter of grant of bail. Seemingly, the Court of Session was kept in dark and the bail was granted. Now since bail has been granted, it would not be proper to cancel it but there is nothing illegal to do so. As observed in Cr. M. No. 3847 -M of 1986 (Shamsher Singh v. State of Punjab, 1987(1) R.C.R.(Criminal) 53, Cr. M. No. 3847 -M of 1986,) decided today, the bond in terms of money need to have been heavy in the instant case. But as decided in that case no alteration need be made in the instant case in terms of the bond.;