SATI PRASAD VERMA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application for bail arises out of Case Crime No. 396 of 1996 under Section 8/20/23 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act. 1985 (in short the Act), police station Dumariaganj, district Sidharthriagar, According to the prosecution case the applicant was found in possession of 6 kg of ganja for which he could not produce any licence.

(2.) I have heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.

(3.) Argument advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant is that the maximum punishment for the offence of contravention of the Act in relation to ganja would be five years and, therefore the embargo placed on the power of the court to grant bail under Section 37 of the Act would not be attracted. The learned counsel has placed reliance upon Full Bench decision of Patna High Court in Kamlesh Kumar and others v. State of Bihar and a single Judge decision of Karnataka High Court in A. V. Dharma Singh and others v. State of Karnataka. Learned Additional Government Advocate refuted the submission and urged that having regard to the quantity of the contraband seized from his possession, the applicant is not entitled to bail.