SAT PAL, J. ( 1 ) THIS is a petition for grant of bail under section 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code. ( 2 ) MR. Chawla, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, contended that in the present case there is violation of section 55 of the NDPS Act, 1985 inasmuch as the CFSL form was not deposited by the SHO with the Malkhana and the same was also not sent to CFSL laboratory along with the sample. In this connection be drew my attention to the statement of Public Witness 2 Constable Shyam Singh wherein he has stated that, "there is no mention for form CFSL in the list of articles entered in the malkhana register. " Learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 9th June, 1990. He, therefore, submitted that the petitioner should be released on bail. In support of his contention, the learned counsel placed reliance in the cases of Gurbax Bhiryani VS. N. C. B. , 1992 (3) Crimes 786 and Mool Chand VS. State, Criminal A. . 82/91 decided on 8. 2:1993. ( 3 ) MR. Jolly, learned counsel, appearing on behalf of the State, however, submitted that the SHO in his statement recorded undersection 161 Cr. P. C. has clearly stated that the CFSL form was duly filed and deposited with the moherar malkhana and his statement is yet to be recorded before the learned trial court. Learned counsel for the State further submitted that the sample was taken to CFSL laboratory by Constable Kanhiya Lal, who is also yet to be examined. ( 4 ) I have given my thoughtful consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties. Keeping in view the fact that the SHO , who in his statement under section 161 Cr. P. C. has stated that the CFSL form was deposited with malkhana and constable Kanhiya Lal, who had taken the sample to the CFSL laboratory, both are yet to be examined, I am of the view that this is not a fit case for grant of bail at this stage. In view of the aforesaid facts the decisions relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner are also not relevant at this stage. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed. In view of the aforesaid facts the decisions relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner are also not relevant at this stage. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed. ( 5 ) HOWEVER, the observations made herein above will have no bearings on the merit of the case.