JUDGMENT 1. - This case has brought to my notice how the Magistrates are acting against the Provisions of the Act and in a case under section 8/18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act) in the matter of giving remand. 2. On 25th August, 1992 on the basis of an information, said to have been received on 24.8.92 the office of the Narcotic Department Jhalawar in Jeep No. RI-20 1120 left Jhalawar at 5.30 p.m. and reached the house of Phool Chand the accused petitioner situated in village Khandwe Tehsil Ramganj Mandi District Kota. The accused petitioner is said to have been present in the house and in the presence of Motbirs opium weighing more than 4 kg. was recovered on search from the possession of the accused petitioner. On re-weighing the opium it was found 4 kg and 100 gms. Samples were taken and seized and were sent to the chemical examination. The remaining opium was separately sealed. The accused-petitioner was arrested immediately on the spot under section 8/ 18 of the Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act. 3. The accused petitioner was produced on 25.8.92 before the Munsif and Judicial Magistrate Ramganj Mandi and he was remanded to the Judicial custody upto 5th September, 1992. He was thereafter also remanded to judicial, custody upto 18.9.92 and upto 29.9.92 and then upto 12.10.92, then further upto 24.10.92, then again upto 5.11.92 and then upto 19.22.92. On 19.11.92 a complaint was filed before the said Magistrate who remanded the accused to further remand upto 28.11.92 and directed that the accused be produced before the Sessions Judge. 4. A perusal of the aforesaid facts will show that it was the Magistrate before whom the accused was produced, who remanded the accused to custody and the remand was for more than 90 days. 5. Now a look at the relevant provisions of the Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act is necessary. Section 36 of that Act makes a provision under which the Government may for the purpose of providing speady trial of the offences under this Act by notification in the Official Gazette constitute as many Special Courts as may be necessary for such areas as may be specified in the notification. Section 36 of that Act makes a provision under which the Government may for the purpose of providing speady trial of the offences under this Act by notification in the Official Gazette constitute as many Special Courts as may be necessary for such areas as may be specified in the notification. A special Court shall consist of a single Judge who shall be appointed by the Government with the concurrence of the Chief Justice of the High Court. Under Sub-section (3) of Section 36 it is provided that a person shall not be qualified for appointment as Judge of a Special Court unless he is immediately before such appointment, a Sessions Judge or an Additional Sessions Judge. It will, therefore, be clear that only a Sessions Judge or Additional Sessions Judge can be appointed as a Special Judge for the Special Court constituted under section 36(1) for trial of the cases under the Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act. Section 36-A, of the Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act provides that an offence in this Act shall be triable only by the Special Courts constituted for the area in which the offence has been committed or where there are more Special Courts than one for such area, by such one of them as may be specified in this behalf by the Government. Therefore, the exclusive jurisdiction has been conferred for trial of the cases under Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act on the Special Courts. Not only this, it will further be seen that powers have been conferred on special Court to take cognizance of the offence and, therefore, the cognizance of the offence has to be taken by the special Courts and no commitment of the case is necessary. Under Section 36A(b) of the aforesaid Act where a person accused of or suspected of the commission of an offence under this Act is forwarded to a Magistrate under Sub-section (2) or Sub-section (2A) of Section 167 of the Cr.P.C., such Magistrate may authorise the detention of such person in such custody as he thinks fit for a period not exceeding fifteen days in the whole where such person is a Judicial Magistrate and seven days in the whole where such Magistrate is an Executive Magistrate. But under the proviso to the aforesaid provision when such person is forwarded to him as aforesaid or upon or at any time before the expiry of the period of detention authorised by him, that the detention of such person is unnecessary, he shall order such person to be forwarded to the Special Court having jurisdiction. It will, therefore, he clear that the detention cannot be authorised by a Magistrate beyond fifteen days and even in a case where he feels that further remand is unnecessary, he has no jurisdiction except to forward the accused to the Special Court having jurisdiction. By virtue of Sub-section (c) of Section 36 of the Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, the Special Court may exercise, in relation to the person forwarded to it under Clause (b), the same power which a Magistrate having jurisdiction to try a case may exercise under Section 167 of the Cr.P.C. in relation to an accused person in such case who has been forwarded to hint under that section. Uuder Section 36A(d), a Special Court may, upon a perusal of police report of the facts constituting an offence under this Act or upon a complaint made by an officer of the Central Government or a State Government authorised in this behalf, take cognizance of that offence without the accused being committed to it for trial, and when trying an offence under this Act, a Special Court may also try an offence other than an offence under this Act with which the accused may under the Cr.P.C. he charged at the same trial. It will, therefore, be clear from the perusal of the aforesaid provisions that the exclusive jurisdiction has been conferred on the Special Court to try the person accused for the offence under Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act without the accused being committed to it. It will, therefore, be clear from the perusal of the aforesaid provisions that the exclusive jurisdiction has been conferred on the Special Court to try the person accused for the offence under Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act without the accused being committed to it. It will, therefore, be seen that the Magistrate in a case under the Act has only powers to remand the accused in the whole fora period of fifteen days and thereafter he has no powers to remand the accused and then he has to forward the accused only to the Special Court who has thereafter jurisdiction to authorise the detention of the accused in further judicial custody but in no case by virtue of the provisions contained in Section 167 of the Cr.P.C. even the Special Court or the Judge of the Special Court which has jurisdiction to order the detention of an accused in judicial custody without taking cognizance of the offence within the time specified therein. 6. A look at Section 167 Cr.P.C. will show that a maximum period of 90 days has been provided for completing the investigation and the Special Court along can authorise the detention of the person otherwise than in the custody of the police beyond the period of 15 days,hut in no case beyond a period of90 days. It will be seen from the various remands made by the Magistrate that he ordered the accused to be remanded beyond a period of fifteen days to which he was not authorised. Not only this, it will further be seen that the total period of detention in judicial custody is exceeding 90 days. It has already been said that the Magistrate has no powers to take cognizance of the offence under Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act and exclusive jurisdiction to take cognizance of the offence has been conferred under the Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act only on the Special Courts. The Magistrate, therefore, has not taken cognizance of the offence and forwarded and could not have taken cognizance and simply on 19.11.92 when the complaint was filed before him directed that the accused be produced before the Special Courtand remanded the accused upto 28.11.1992. 1 fail to understand how the complaint can be filed before the Magistrate who has no jurisdiction in the matter. 1 fail to understand how the complaint can be filed before the Magistrate who has no jurisdiction in the matter. The complain in the case of Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act can he filed before the Special Court who alone has jurisdiction to take cognizance and to try the accused. Be that as it may, it can he said that by the time the learned Magistrate ordered that the accused be produced before the Special Court on 28.11.92, the period of 90 days had been extended and thereby a right has been conferred on the accused to be released on bail. 7. Consequently, on the ground that the cognizance of the offence does not appear to have been taken within 90 days by the Special Court, by the Judge of the Special Court, I allow this application and direct that the accused petitioner Phool Chand, son of Dhanna Lal shall be released on hail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 15,000/- with two sureties of Rs. 7,500/each to the satisfaction of the Trial Court undertaking to appear in that Court or any other Court on all dates of hearing or as and when called upon to do so. 8. I direct the Registrar, Rajasthan High Court to send the copies of this order to each and every Court of the Magistrate as well as to the Special Court so that hence-forth the provisions of the Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act are not contravened and unnecessary complications are not created. The Magistrates should be directed to comply with the provisions of the Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act in the light of the observations made in this order.Petition allowed. *******