- (1.)Abdull Rashid Dar, petitioner before this court was arrested on 6.6.1998, after being found carrying a contraband drug (Brown sugar). He is shown accused in FIR 130/98 under Section 8/20 N.D.P.S Act, registered at p/s Budgam. The petitioner was refused bail by District and Sessions Judge Budgam, the trial court, under his order dated: 12.9.98. Against this order revision has been failed in this Court. Petitioner has also moved as applicating for bail separately. The grounds put forth for bail are:-
That the allegation of seizure of brown sugar from the person of accused is false and baseless incrimination allegation levelled by the concerned police. The petitioner is stated to have been in custody of the police much earlier to the date when the recovery of contraband is shown/seized from him, After arrest of petitioner and before search it was incumbent upon Investigating Agency to inform the accused that if he so likes he can be brought before a Gazetted Officer or a Magistrate for purpose of search, pursuant to mandatory provisions of Section 50 of N.D.P.S Act. This has not been down. Once the provision of section 50 has not been complied with SIC the prosecution case gets weakened so much so it cannot be presumed that there are reasonable grounds for believing commission of offence by the accused for purpose of bail. The accused was not informed of this right. There is nothing even on record to indicate that the investigating officer has complied with Section 50 of NDPS Act. Not only so the Investigating Officer, who recovered the substance (Brown Sugar) from the accused himself investigated the case and completed the investigation which has culminated in filing the charge sheet against the accused in court. This aspect of the matter cannot be also lost sight of. Besides, the petitioner is a youth of just 20 years of age with no criminal record or past history of the sort. The order passed by the trial court is not informed of all these aspects and has been passed in routine.

(2.)The other side has appeared through M/S M.I.Qadri, Senior Additional Advocate General, M.Amin, and G.Ali Govt. Advocates Mr.G.Ali has addressed arguments in the matter.
(3.)Respondents have opposed the bail on the ground that even though the investigation agency is not shown to have complied with Section 50 of NDPS Act, same does not entitle the accused to get bail, as the compliance with section 50 of NDPS Act can be established during the trial by the prosecution. The accused has been caught red-handed while carrying the contraband, therefore, he should not be given bail notwithstanding that the challan has been produced in the court.