M.G. Mukherji, J. - (1.) Heard. Accused applicant No.1 Rajendra Prasad Gupta happens to be the proprietor of one Numex Chemical Products in Patel Nagar, Hapur in Uttar Pradesh and applicant No.2 happens to be his son. The said Numex Chemical Products is alleged to be the supplier of certain chemicals to Kota Glass Works. It is further alleged by the prosecution that police on suspicion arrested one Chander and on the basis of his statements, arrested further Arvind Mittal and Ashok Mittal, who are said to be the proprietors of Kota Glass Works. The prosecution case further is that this Kota Glass Works secure Acetic Anhydrite by way of supply of chemicals from Numex Chemical Products. This Acetic Anhydrite is a controlled substance within the meaning of Section 2 (vii a) of the Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short 'the Act'), since the said chemical is used for making Smack from Opium. It is the specific case of the present applicants the father and the son, that they do not disown having supplied ordinary chemicals to Kota Glass Works but they have not supplied Acetic Anhydrite, the alleged controlled substance within the meaning of the Act and that the said Kota Glass Works might have procured the said chemical from some other source, be that as it may, there is some witness available that Kota Glass Works use to place orders from time to time with regard to different chemicals with Numex Chemical Products. The prosecution has indeed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that in fact the controlled substance which formed the subject matter of the criminal offence, was in fact supplied by the present applicants as owners of Numex Chemical Products. Be that as it may the investigation has culminated in a charge sheet against both the accused persons. So far as applicant No. 2 Vikas's complicity is concerned, it is found that he has accepted certain orders but then the question whether the order was for supply of Acetic Anhydrite, the so-called regulated substance, is not thereby clinched. I find that Numex Chemical Products has a licence for carrying out the business of manufacture and supply of chemicals but then there is nothing on record that the said licence also covers controlled substances within the meaning of the Act. The Central Government has the ultimate power having regard to the use of any controlled substance, to regulate and prohibit the production, manufacture, supply and distribution thereof and the trade and commerce therein. Mr. Agrawal submits that under the provisions of paragraph 5 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance (Regulation of Controlled Substances) Order, 1993, every person who sells a controlled substance to a buyer in a transaction of one hundred kilograms and above shall sell so only after the buyer establishes his identity by production of documents like industrial licence or any registration certificate under any law or any other similar document which establishes his identity and upon a declaration being made of the purpose for which the controlled substance is being purchased. The prosecution has to prove however what was the bulk of the materials so sold by the Numex Chemical Products and under what type of stipulation from Kota Glass Works. Be that as it may, police recovered 32 bottles bearing labels of Organic Solvent each weighing 500 ml. It suspected the bottles to contain Acetic Anhydrite instead of Organic Solvent, as was disclosed on the labels affixed to the bottles and on suspicion as regards commitment of offence under Section 9A read with Section 25A of the Act, submitted charge sheet against Arvind Mittal,' Ashok Mittal be proprietors of Kota Glass Works and the present applicants.
(2.) The investigation is however, complete. I find that in so far as applicant No.2 is concerned, he is an examinee for the higher secondary examination which is to commence on and from 27.2.1997. The punishment as provided under Section 25A of the Act is that the accused may be punishable with rigorous imprisonment for a term which-may extend to ten years and shall also be liable for a fine which may extend to one lakh rupees, provided that the Court may, for reasons to be recorded in the judgment, impose a fine exceeding one lakh rupees. Lander Section 37(1 )(b) of the Act, no person accused of an offence punishable for a term of imprisonment of five years or more under this Act shall be released on bail or on his own bond unless-the Public Prosecutor has been given an opportunity to oppose the application for such release. Here the Public Prosecutor has been heard and he has opposed with vehemence the granting of bail in so far as applicant No.1 is concerned. The Court can grant bail provided it is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that an accused is not guilty of such offence and that he is not likely to commit any offence and that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail. In so far as applicant No.2 is concerned, who is aged some what around 17 years, this Court is prima-facie of the view that there are reasonable grounds of believing that he is not the real guilty person in this offence and that he is not likely to commit such offence while on bail. Moreover there is a competitive examination which he has to face. Be that as it may, this Court grants bail to Vikas son of Rajendra Prasad Gupta (Applicant No.2) in FIR No. 270/96 of police station Kotwali, Kota, provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rs. Twenty thousand only) with two sureties each of the sum of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. Ten thousand only) to the satisfaction of the appropriate N.D.RS. court at Kota, with the stipulation to appear in that Court or any other Court on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when he is called upon to do so during the pendency of trial. The prayer for bail is rejected in so far as applicant No.1 is concerned.;