Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2001 DIGILAW 6 (GAU)

MD. GAZI KHAN MD. ALIMUDDIN v. STATE OF MANIPUR

2001-01-11

A.H.SAIKIA

body2001
JUDGEMENT Heard Mr. Ch. Narendra, ld. counsel for the petitioner as well as Mrs. Ch. Bidyamani Devi learned P. P. 2. This bail application is moved before this Court by the petitioner on behalf of his son, Md. Gazi Khan, who was arrested on 17-10-2000 in connection with FIR case No. 17 (10) 2000 SPT P. S. u/S. 20(b) 60(3) ND and PS Act. 3. The facts of the case, as emerges from the FIR are that the accused, Gazi Khan, along with one T. Hopping were arrested by the personnel of 21 Assam Rifles at the time of making normal checking at Senapati. During the course of such checking by the Assam Rifles, a Jeep bearing Regn. No. MN 04/6135 wherein both the individuals were travelling, the personnel of Assam Rifles found therein 106 kgs of Ganja contained in 6 gunny bags which were also seized. 4. Mrs. Ch. Bidyamani Devi, ld. P. P. has produced the Case diary and I have perused the same. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the accused, Gazi Khan, is a juvenile aged about 14 years old and he was prosecuting his studies in a local school, namely Abushidik Junior High School, Kairang Khunjil. In this regard, the learned counsel produces the original copy of a transfer certificate of the said school wherein the date of birth of the accd., Gazi Khan has been shown as 1-1-1987 and if the said Certificate is accepted, his age will be about 13 years as on today. That apart, the learned counsel also submits that the accused was arrested u/S. 20(b) of NDPS Act and the offence so committed under that section shall not come under the purview of Section 37(b) of the said Act, and as such the accused is entitled to be released on bail. In order to support this contention the learned counsel made a reference to a decision of the Apex Court in Braj Kishore Thakur v. Union of India reported in (1997) 2 Supreme 471 : ( AIR 1997 SC 1157 ). It is also submitted by the learned counsel that the other co-accused namely, T. Hopping has already been released on bail on 15-12-2000 by the learned Special Judge, NDPS Court Manipur and in this regard he has produced the certified copy of the said order before this Court which I have perused. 6. Mrs. It is also submitted by the learned counsel that the other co-accused namely, T. Hopping has already been released on bail on 15-12-2000 by the learned Special Judge, NDPS Court Manipur and in this regard he has produced the certified copy of the said order before this Court which I have perused. 6. Mrs. Bidyamani Devi, learned P. P. with her vehemence submits that under the ND and PS Act there is no provision for asking relief as juvenile. She further argues that provision of Sect. 20(b) is also attracted to the limitation of Section 37(b). In support of her contention she relies on a decision of Bombay High Court in Chhotu v. State of Maharashtra, Respondent reported in 1995 Cri LJ 875. 7. Taking into consideration of the facts and circusmtances on perusal of the case records and upon hearing of the parties, I am of the opinion that the case law cited by the learned P. P. cannot be attracted in this case in view of the Apex Court decision in Braj Kishore's case : ( AIR 1997 SC 1157 ) (supra) and accordingly I am inclined to grant bail to the accused person. 8. In Braj Kishore Thakur's case ( AIR 1997 SC 1157 ) (supra) the Apex Court in dealing with a case of castigation of the learned Special Judge by the learned Single Judge of Patna High Court, accepted the decision of a Division Bench of Patna High Court in Kamalesh Kumar v. State of Bihar, reported in (1994) 2 Pat LJR 600 in which it was held that "when an accused is charged with offence under Section 20(b)(i) of the NDPS Act, the power under Section 37(i)(b) of the said Act is not to be attracted". The rationale of the said case is applicable in the present case. 9. Be it mentioned herein that since the accused, admittedly, is a minor as evident from the school records as well as from police case diary wherein it is stated that his age to be 18 years, after his release on bail, be shall be put under the custody of his father, the petitioner who shall produce the accused Md. Gazi Khan before the concerned Investigation Officer as and when required. 10. For the reasons, dicussions and observations indicated above, it is ordered that the accused Md. Gazi Khan shall be released on bail of Rs. Gazi Khan before the concerned Investigation Officer as and when required. 10. For the reasons, dicussions and observations indicated above, it is ordered that the accused Md. Gazi Khan shall be released on bail of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judge (NDPS) Manipur. This bail application is disposed of accordingly. Ordered accordingly.