JUDGMENT 1. - This bail application under Section 438 Cr. P. C. has been tiled in F. I. R. No. 328/86 registered at police station Kotwali, Bharatpur on July 11, 1986 in a case under Section 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act. 2. On October 18, 1985 Assistant District Supply Officer, Bharatpur inspected the Firm M/s Shiv Prasad Gupta and Sons, Station Road, Bharatpur which is running a diesel and petrol pump on Station Road. The Firm is a licensee under Rajasthan Petroleum Products Licencing and Control Order, 1979. Three samples of diesel were drawn and signatures of one of the partners Hari Shanker present on the spot were obtained. This sample was taken after paying the price of the diesel and was later on sent for Public Analysis to Forensic Science Laboratory on October 24, 1985. The Forensic Science Laboratory opined that the sample was adulterated and kerosene was added to it and the case is under investigation. The accused apprehending his arrest moved an application for anticipatory bail which was rejected by the Sessions Judge, Bharatpur. When the application was filed in this Court it was contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the report filed by the Forensic Science Laboratory is absolutely laconic and it is not known as to what was the adulteration as the data's have not been mentioned therein. Other points were also agitated and this court directed the Public Prosecutor to produce the diary vide order, dated July 28, 1986. When the petitioner stated that there was no adulteration in the diesel and it is confirmed to the I. S. I. standard the learned Public Prosecutor on August 4, 1986 wanted time to consult the officials of the Forensic Science Laboratory. Thereafter the case came up on August 6, 1986 before me. I, in my order, dated August 6, 1986, mentioned that Shri R. C. Sharma, Deputy Director Chemistry, State Forensic Science Laboratory, Jaipur attended the court and stated that the sample was found adulterated because flash point: Abel 0C should have been 38 as per the test applied by method P. 20. He produced before me a book-let published by I S. I. Manak Bhawan, New Delhi printed in 1984. Mr. Dhankhar thereafter submitted that the book-let is out-dated and not up-to-date. His submission was that the figures of 38 have been reduced to 32 by an amendment in 1985. He produced before me a book-let published by I S. I. Manak Bhawan, New Delhi printed in 1984. Mr. Dhankhar thereafter submitted that the book-let is out-dated and not up-to-date. His submission was that the figures of 38 have been reduced to 32 by an amendment in 1985. I, therefore, directed the Registry to seek a clarification from the Chief Quality Control Manager as well as Indian Standard Institution. Letters were written by the Registry on August 7, 1986 but no reply has been received till date. However reply has been received by the Firm both from I. S. R. as well as Indian Oil Corporation and the same has been placed on record. 3. In letter No. PCDC 3/T of 1986-80-07 of the Director (P & C). Indian Standard Institution, New Delhi, wherein the copy of the third amendment was supplied to them. This amendment reads as under : "Amendment No. 3 October 1985. To IS : 1460-1974 Specification For Diesel Fuels (Second Revision) Page 5, Table 1, Sl No. (ix), Col (3)-substitute `32' for `38'. The letter No. JDO-R : 231 dated August 11, 1986 has been written by Chief DIV. MGR. to the petitioner Firm who has also informed that flash point : Abel C Min. has been relaxed to 32 from 38 w.e.f. October, 1985 as per IS amendment No. III Oct. 85. He has also placed before me the latest book-let wherein amendment No. III to the above effect has been pasted. 4. This all leads me to an irresistible conclusion that there was an amendment and the Rajasthan Forensic Science Laboratory has examined the sample and gave its report on the basis of the specifications which were outdated. 5. Mr. Sharma had categorically stated before me as I have observed in my order-sheet, dated August 6, 1986 also that the adulteration was because of the flash point. The very basis of the report of the Forensic Science Laboratory therefore, is based on the old standards which have been changed, and, therefore, in my opinion there are good grounds for presuming that the accused may be acquitted if prosecuted in this case, and, therefore, I find it to be a fit case where anticipatory bail should be granted to the accused-petitioners. 6. 6. I would like to observe that it is unfortunate that the State Forensic Science Laboratory is not upto date in its library and the outdated data was used for the purpose of testing the sample. The report of the Forensic Science Laboratory is dated April 30, 1986 and amendment has been made with effect from Oct. 85, therefore, there is no justification that by 30th April, 1986, the Laboratory could not know about the amendment which has resulted in registration of criminal case against three persons. It is expected of the State Forensic Science Laboratory to keep its library up to date and to give its reports only after verifying the latest position in respect of the material analysed. The law enjoins upon the court to admit in evidence the report without even calling an expert in the courts which means that a great sanctity is attached to these reports. If the laboratory itself gives the report based on outdated record, then a great harm can be caused to the accused persons and which also will shake the faith and confidence of the people in the State Forensic Science Laboratory. It behoves to those who are in charge of administration to keep complete liaison with various departments from where the amendment can be proceed and the reports must be in consonance with the latest amendments. It is expected of the Deputy Director Chemistry that in case he finds that the sample it in conformity with the amended data , then it is moral obligation to re-inform the investigating officer and intimate him to give the final report on this count and in case the charge-sheet is submitted to write to the Government for withdrawal of such prosecution. This is the minimum which can be done in such circumstances. 7. For the reasons mentioned above, I would direct that in the event of the arrest of the accused-petitioners Shiv Prasad Gupta. Hari Shanker and Ravi Shanker shall be released on bail provided each of them furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 2000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of S H. O . For the reasons mentioned above, I would direct that in the event of the arrest of the accused-petitioners Shiv Prasad Gupta. Hari Shanker and Ravi Shanker shall be released on bail provided each of them furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 2000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of S H. O . Arresting Officer/Investigating Officer, police station Kotwali, Bharatpur in F. I. R. No. 328/86 subject to the following conditions : (a) That the petitioners shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (b) That the petitioners shall not directly, or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case, so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer; and (c) That the petitioners shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court. A copy of this order shall forthwith be sent to the Dy. Director (Chemistry) Forensic Lab., Police Academy Shastrinager, Jaipur.Application allowed. *******