JUDGMENT : - P.S.Rana, Judge. Present petition filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 for grant bail in connection with case FIR No.66 of 2014 dated 4.7.2014 registered under Sections 27A-15-61 of the Narcotic drugs and psychotropic substance Act 1985 at Police Station Kot, District Bilaspur HP. 2. It is pleaded that co-accused Satnam Singh and Maninder Singh have been bailed out by learned Sessions Judge, Bilaspur. It is pleaded that applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to personal enmity. It is further pleaded that recovered quantity of contraband is less than commercial quantity. It is pleaded that investigation of present case is complete. It is further pleaded that applicant did not commit any offence as alleged in the FIR. It is further pleaded that applicant will join investigation and trial as and when required by the Investigating Officer. Prayer for acceptance of bail application sought. 3. Per contra police report filed. There is recital in police report that FIR No. 66 of 2014 dated 4.7.2014 has been registered against the applicant under Sections 27A-15-61 of the Narcotic drugs and psychotropic substance Act 1985 at Police Station Kot Kehloor District Bilaspur HP. There is further recital in police report that on dated 3.7.2014 Inspector/SHO along with ASI Suresh Kumar, Constable Sunil Kumar and Constable Vivek Singh were on patrolling duty in a vehicle bearing registration No.HP69A-0974. There is further recital in police report that at about 8 PM a secret information received that applicant Amrik Singh son of Joginder Singh resident of village Majari Tehsil Naina Devi District Bilaspur deals in contraband business and there was an information that popy husk would be recovered. There is further recital in police report that report of secret information was sent to Sub Divisional Police Officer Naina Devi under Section 42(2) of the ND&PS Act 1985. There is further recital in police report that two persons met who were coming from the house of applicant Amrik Singh. There is further recital in police report that said persons disclosed their names Satnam Singh son of Tarlok Singh and Maninder Singh son of Tarsem Singh. There is further recital in police report that 1kg. 100 grams popy husk was recovered from the possession of Satnam Singh and 900 grams popy husk was recovered from the possession of Maninder Singh. There is further recital in police report that said persons disclosed their names Satnam Singh son of Tarlok Singh and Maninder Singh son of Tarsem Singh. There is further recital in police report that 1kg. 100 grams popy husk was recovered from the possession of Satnam Singh and 900 grams popy husk was recovered from the possession of Maninder Singh. There is further recital in police report that recovered contraband was sealed in a parcel and NCB forms in triplicate were prepared. There is further recital in police report that applicant Amrik Singh was selling popy husk. There is further recital in police report that statement of applicant Amrik Singh recorded under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act. There is further recital in police report that two drums of 90 Kg each which were concealed in river were recovered. There is further recital in police report that report of chemical analyst FSL Junga received. There is further recital in police report that applicant Amrik Singh is involved in committing the offence punishable under Section 27A of the ND&PS Act. There is further recital in police report that four cases have been registered against the applicant under ND&PS Act and 9 cases have been registered against the applicant under Excise Act. There is further recital in police report that applicant is dealing in the business of contraband since 24 years. There is further recital in police report that if the applicant is released on bail then again the applicant would involve in the business of contraband and would spoil the life of the youth of country. There is further recital in police report that applicant will also threat the prosecution witness. Prayer for dismissal of bail application sought. 4. Court heard learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant and learned Additional Advocate General appearing on behalf of the non-applicant and also perused entire records carefully. 5. Submission of learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant that other co-accused namely Satnam Singh and Maninder Singh have been released and on the concept of parity the applicant be also released on bail in the present case is denied for the reason hereinafter mentioned. 5. Submission of learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant that other co-accused namely Satnam Singh and Maninder Singh have been released and on the concept of parity the applicant be also released on bail in the present case is denied for the reason hereinafter mentioned. It is well settled law that at the time of granting bail following factors are to be considered such as (i) Nature and seriousness of offence (ii) The character of the evidence (iii) Circumstances which are peculiar to the accused (iv) Possibility of the presence of the accused at the trial or investigation (v) Reasonable apprehension of witnesses being tampered with (vi) The larger interests of the public or the State. See AIR 1978 SC 179 titled Gurcharan Singh and others Vs. State (Delhi Administration. Also see AIR 1962 SC 253 titled The State Vs. Captain Jagjit Singh. The allegation against co-accused Satnam Singh and co-accused Maninder Singh and the allegation against applicant Amrik Singh are different allegation. The allegation against co-accused Satnam Singh is that 1kg. 100 gram popy husk was recovered from co-accused Satnam Singh and 900 grams popy husk was recovered from co-accused Maninder Singh which falls below commercial quantity. It is well settled law that ND&PS Act is a special Act. It is well settled law that rider of Section 37 of ND&PS Act 1985 will apply for the grant of bail. It is well settled law that if there is conflict between general law and special law then special law always prevails. The allegations against the applicant are that applicant is running the business of selling popy husk and the applicant has been charged for the offence under section 27A of the ND&PS Act. Bail qua offence punishable under ND &PS Act has been mentioned under Section 37 of the Narcotic drugs and psychotropic substance Act 1985 and there is a special recital under Section 37(a)(b) that no person qua an offence punishable under Section 19 or Section 24 or Section 27A shall be released on bail unless Public Prosecutor has been given an opportunity to oppose the bail application for release on bail (2) Where the Public Prosecutor opposes the bail application the court is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that accused is not guilty of such offence and that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail. In the present case learned Additional Advocate General has opposed the bail application and finding of reasonable grounds for believing that applicant is not guilty of such offence and finding that applicant would not likely to commit any offence while on bail cannot be given at this stage of case. In view of the rider mentioned in Section 37 of the Narcotic drugs and psychotropic substance Act 1985 it is not expedient in the ends of justice to release the applicant on bail at this stage of case. It is held that limitations of granting of bail specified in clause (b) of sub-section 37(1) are in addition to the limitations under the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 or any other law for the time being in force on granting of bail. 6. In view of the above stated facts the bail application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 is rejected being devoid of any force. Observation made hereinabove is strictly for the purpose of deciding the present bail application and it shall not effect merits of the case in any manner. All pending application(s) if any are also disposed of.