JUDGMENT Mr. Vijender Singh Malik, J.: - Crl. Misc. No. 1342-43 of 2012 Applications are allowed. Annexure P4 is taken on record and the petitioner is exempted from filing certified copy of Annexure P4. Main Petition 2. The petitioner has prayed for grant of regular bail under the provisions of section 439 Cr. P.C. by way of FIR No.141 dated 28.7.2011 at Police Station Sadar Amritsar for an offence punishable under section 22 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, “the Act”). The case against the petitioner is that he was found keeping in his possession the following tablets/capsules :- i). Microlit 10,000 tablets ii). Parvon Spas 1,000 capsules iii). Proxyvon 100 capsules. 3. He was not having any licence to keep the same in his possession. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 28.7.2011. According to him, he was only a carrier of the drugs, which were ordered by a chemist. According to him, the chemist has though, denied having ordered the said drugs, yet the offence against the petitioner is just on technical grounds. He has further submitted that in the absence of a shop, the petitioner cannot be believed to sell the drugs in the open and this shows that he was carrying the goods for the chemist. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that the quantity of the material recovered is non commercial quantity, on account of which the petitioner can be granted bail for the reason that he has been in custody for the last more than 5 months. 6. Learned State counsel has submitted, on the other hand, that the quantity of material recovered in this case is commercial quantity. According to him, as per the notification dated 18.11.2009, not the pure drug contents but the whole substance has to be taken into consideration to find out if the quantity recovered is ‘commercial’ or ‘non commercial’. According to him, the petitioner, was therefore, found to keep in his possession commercial quantity of the contraband and is not entitled to bail. According to him, such type of intoxicants are being sold to the youth from other places and not through the medical stores only. 7. According to him, the petitioner, was therefore, found to keep in his possession commercial quantity of the contraband and is not entitled to bail. According to him, such type of intoxicants are being sold to the youth from other places and not through the medical stores only. 7. Though the pure contents of the drugs recovered from the possession of the petitioner may qualify for ‘non commercial quantity’, yet as per the notification dated 18.11.2009, only the pure drug content is not to be considered. Keeping in view the recovery being of quantity of drugs covered by the Act, I do not find the petitioner to be entitled to bail. The petition is, consequently, dismissed. ----------------