A. S. TRIPATHI, J. Applicant, Prem Narain Sharma, is involved in a case Crime No. 867 of 1991 under Section 8/21, N. D. P. S. Act, Police Station Jaitpur district Varanasi. 2. It is alleged in the F. I. R. that the applicant alongwith one Atul Kumar Sharma was found at railway station Cantt, Varanasi when they were apprehended. It is alleged that 100 grams of heroin was recovered from the possession of the applicant and 170 grams heroin was recovered from the possession of Atul Kumar Sharma. The affidavit filed in support of the bail application shows that Atul Kumar is the nephew of the applicant. The applicant has denied the recovery of heroin from his possession. 3. The applicant has taken only one ground for grant of bail in his application that he is an infirm person being physically handicapped and he claims bail on that ground. He has also alleged that his wife is also disabled person and the applicant was unable to move alone. 4. I have heard learned Counsel for the applicant. I have also heard the learned Counsel for the Union of India, Sri Shiva Ji Misra, at great length on all points in view of Section 37, N. D. P. S. Act and the provisions contained in the Criminal Procedure Code. 5. The first point raised was that the provisions of Section 437, Cr. P. C. do not apply and the applicant cannot claim the benefit of the proviso to Section 437, Cr. P. C. in view of the provisions of Section 37 of the N. D. P. S. Act. 6. The general principles of bail are contained in Sections 437 and 439, Cr. P. C. The special provisions are contained in Section 37 of the N. D. P. S. Act. Section 37 of the N. D. P. S. Act provides as under: "37. 6. The general principles of bail are contained in Sections 437 and 439, Cr. P. C. The special provisions are contained in Section 37 of the N. D. P. S. Act. Section 37 of the N. D. P. S. Act provides as under: "37. Offences to be cognizable and non-bailable.- (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), - (a) every offence punishable under this Act shall be cognizable; (b) 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 - (i) the Public Prosecutor has been given an opportunity to oppose the application for such release and (ii) where the Public Prosecutor opposes the application, the Court is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that he is not guilty of such offence and that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail. (2) The limitations on granting of bail specified in clause (b) of sub-section (1) are in addition to the limitations under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2) of (1974) or any other law for the time being in force on granting of bail. It was argued by the learned Counsel for the applicant that in spite of special provisions contained under Section 37 of N. D. P. S. Act exception provided under Section 437, Cr. P. C. are not taken away. Section 437, Cr. P. C. provided that when any person is accused of commission of any non-bailable offence, punishable with death or imprisonment for life or such person has been previously convicted with death, imprisonment for life or imprisonment for seven years or more is not entitled to bail, but first proviso has been added to this which is as below: - "provided that the court may direct that a person referred to in clause (i) or clause (ii) be released on bail if such person is under the age of sixteen years or is a woman or is sick or infirm. " 7. It has been contended on behalf of the applicant that the applicant being physically disposed comes under the category of an infirm person and under this Proviso he is entitled to bail. " 7. It has been contended on behalf of the applicant that the applicant being physically disposed comes under the category of an infirm person and under this Proviso he is entitled to bail. The learned Counsel for the State and the Union of India vehemently urged (sic) that the benefit of this provision cannot be given to the applicant in view of the special provisions contained under Section 37 of the N. D. P. S. Act. 8. The learned Counsel for the Union of India referred the case of Narcotic Control Bureau v. Krishna Lal and others, AIR 1991 SC 558 : 1991 JIC 275 (SC ). It was held in that case the High Course power under Section 439, Cr. P. C. to grant bail is subject to limitation under Section 37 of the N. D. P. S. Act. The powers of the High Court to grant bail under Section 439, Cr. P. C. are subject to the limitations contained in the amended Section 37 of the N. D. P. S. Act and the restrictions placed on the powers of the Court under the said sections are applicable to the High Court also in the matter of granting bail. 9. In this case the Honble Supreme Court has laid down a guidelines for grant of bail in much soon under N. D. P. S. Act. Limitations contained under Section 37 of N. D. P. S. Act will prevail over the limitations of general provisions of bail under Section 439, Cr. P. C. In that case an international gang of smuggler were arrested and they were granted bail by the High Court. Cancellation of bail was moved before the Honble Supreme Court and bail was cancelled on the ground that the applicants were involved in international gang of smuggler and were recovered with huge quantity of heroin. 10. Now it is held that the limitations provided under Section 37 of N. D. P. S. Act are in addition to the limitations for granting bail as provided under Sections 437 and 449 Cr. P. C. The general principle now will be that in considering. The grant of bail to the accused punishable under the provisions of N. D. P. S. Act, the limitation provided under Section 37 will have to be taken into consideration and they will be in addition to limitations contained in Sections 437 and 439, Cr. P. C. The general principle now will be that in considering. The grant of bail to the accused punishable under the provisions of N. D. P. S. Act, the limitation provided under Section 37 will have to be taken into consideration and they will be in addition to limitations contained in Sections 437 and 439, Cr. P. C. There is no dispute regarding this aspect of the matter that limitations contained in Section 37 of N. D. P. S. Act will prevail over the limitations contained in Sections 437 and 439, Cr. P. C. 11. Now the question remains as to whether first proviso to Section 437, Cr. P. C. contains the limitations or on exception. The limitations are pro vided under the other proviso to Sections 437 and 439, Cr. P. C. but the first proviso to Section 437, Cr. P. C. is an exception to the general principles of Act granting bail in certain cases. By this exception on being under 16 years of age or woman or sick or infirm person is entitled to bail in spite of the limitations prescribed under the Code of Criminal Procedure. Now the question is as to whether the limitations prescribed in Section 37 of N. D. P. S. Act takes away this enabling first proviso contained in Section 437, Cr. P. C. or this proviso does not apply in the cases covered under the N. D. P. S.-Act. 12. I nave carefully examined the provisions of Section 37 of N. D. P. S. Act and first proviso to Section 437, Cr. P. C. sub-section (2) of Section 37 of N. D. P. S. Act provided that limitation on granting of bail specified in clause (b) of sub-section (1) are in addition to the limitations under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, or any other law for the time being in force for granting of bail. The limitations provided to clause (b) of sub-section (1) of Section 37, N. D. P. S. Act are: " (i) the public prosecutor has been given an opportunity to oppose the application for such release and (ii) where the public prosecutor opposes the application, the court is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that he is not guilty of such offence and that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail ? These are the limitations provided under Section 37 for N. D. P. S. Act. These limitations are in addition to the limitations provided under Sections 437 and 439, Cr. P. C. 13. But in any opinion the first proviso to Section 437, Cr. P. C. is not a limitation. It is an exception to general principles of not granting bail in certain cases. In my view this exception has not taken away by the special provisions of Section 37 of N. D. P. S. Act. 14. By amending Section 36-C the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code have been made applicable to the proceedings under N. D. P. S. Act. Therefore, the first proviso to Section 437 has not been taken away by the Special provisions under Section 37 of N. D. P. S. Act as the first proviso to Section 437, Cr. P. C. contained exception and not limitations. 15. This exception contained in the first proviso to Section 437, Cr. P. C, provides the benefit to certain class of persons irrespective of the nature of offence committed and punishment provided for the same. 16. Thus, I am of the view that in spite of special provisions made under Section 37, N. D. P. S. Act, it provided further limitations in grant of bail and the exceptions provided in the first proviso to Section 437, Cr. P. C. are still applicable in such cases. Once a person proves that either he is below 16 years of age or a woman or a sick or infirm person; this general exception contained in the first proviso to Section 437, Cr. P. C. does apply irrespective of the additional limitation contained under Section 37 of N. D. P. S. Act. 17. It is true that possessing or selling of heroin is heinous crime and hence (sic) to the society, yet the principles of law have to be applied uniformally according to the merits of individual case. 18. In this particular case, the applicant is physically handicap ped. A medical certificate has been produced from the special Board showing that the applicant belongs to the category of physically handicapped group. One of his legs is defective and he is unable to move. This fact is not disputed by the prosecution. 19. In view of the facts and circumstances discussed above I am of the view that first proviso to Section 437, Cr. One of his legs is defective and he is unable to move. This fact is not disputed by the prosecution. 19. In view of the facts and circumstances discussed above I am of the view that first proviso to Section 437, Cr. P. C. enabling as infirm person to be entitled to bail does apply to the applicant in spite of the limitations contained under Section 37 of N. D. P. S. Act. This is the first case of the applicant. He is not involved in any other case and, therefore, it can be reasonably believed that he is not likely to commit another offence during bail. He is also physically handicapped and is unable to move. Therefore, I think that the applicant, in the circumstances, may be enlarged on bail. 20. The applicant, Prem Narain Sharma, is admitted to bail on his furnishing (sic) and personal bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Special Judge N. D. P. S. Act), Varanasi. Bail granted. .