Honble YADAV, J. – Heard the learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned Public Prosecutor at length. (2). It is shocking to note that a very heavy recovery is alleged to have been made from two gunny bags i.e. one containing of 31.800 kg. powder of poppy husk and another containing 30.400 kg. powder of poppy husk. (3). From the allegations made, it appears that these two gunny bags containing the aforesaid incriminating article were lying unclaimed on the roof of the bus. When on suspicion police made a search of the incriminating article and also an enquiry was made from the bus conductor he alleged that these two bags belonged to the accused applicants. (4). It is surprising to note that when enquiry was made by the police officer about tickets of these two accused applicants from the bus conductor Narain Singh he informed to police that he did not consider it proper either to issue passenger tickets or luggage tickets to them. (5). Learned Public Prosecutor urged before me that she when police officer called information from the accused applicants they informed him that these two gunny bags belonged to them. (6). The aforesaid argument advanced by the learned P.P. is not acceptable to me inasmuch as in exercise of its power u/s. 42(1) read with Section 67 of the NDPS Act, 1985 the Central Government has issued a notification No.S.O. 822 (E), dated Nov. 14, 1985, published in the Gazette of India, Extra, Part II, Section 3(ii), dated 14th November, 1985, P.I (No. 6/85/F. No. 664/51/85- OPIUM) empowering the officers of and above the rank of Sub-Inspector in the department of Narcotics and of and above the rank of Inspector in the departments of Central Excise, Customs and Revenue Intelligence and in Central Economic Intelligence Bureau to exercise the powers and perform the duties specified in Section 42 within the area of their respective jurisdiction and also authorises the said officers to exercise the powers conferred upon them under Section 67 of the said Act. (7). Indisputably it is true that the police officers are also authorised under Section 42 of the NDPS Act to enter, to search, to seize and to arrest without warrant or authorisation in exercise of their power u/s. 42 alongwith the aforesaid officers mentioned above. (7). Indisputably it is true that the police officers are also authorised under Section 42 of the NDPS Act to enter, to search, to seize and to arrest without warrant or authorisation in exercise of their power u/s. 42 alongwith the aforesaid officers mentioned above. Yet the Central Government did not consider it proper to confer the power of Section 67 either to the police officer or of the officer belonging to the Border Security Force. (8). For the reasons stated above I am prima-facie satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that both the appli- cants are not guilty for the offence alleged against them on the basis of information alleged to have been given to the police under Section 67 of the NDPS Act. I am also prima-facie satisfied that the applicants are not likely to commit any offence while on bail. (9). As a result of the aforementioned discussion both the applicants viz. Shantilal s/o Laxman and Roshan Lal s/o Laxman are hereby enlarged on bail provided each one of them furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judge, NDPS Act Cases, Udaipur for their appearance in the trial court on each and every date of hearing or whenever called upon to do so till the final disposal of the trial. (10). After dictation of the order, the learned members of the Bar present in the Court made a request to make the order reportable. The request is allowed and to order is made reportable.