JUDGMENT : M.V. MURALIDARAN, J. 1. The petitioner who is the accused No. 3 has filed this petition for bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. based on the case registered by the respondent police under FIR No. 33(04)2019, NAB, P.S. for the offence under Section 22(C)29/60(3) ND & P.S. Act on the allegation of charge of delivering drugs i.e. WY tablets to the other two accused persons. 2. The case of the petitioner is that he was arrested on 06.04.2019 in connection with the above FIR No. 33(04)2019 for the allegation that for the delivering of WY tablets to the two accused persons who were the accused No. 1 and accused No. 2 are arrested on the same day i.e. 06.04.2019 from ISBT, Khuman Lampak. 3. The petitioner further states that he was innocent and not at all related with the said allegations as the petitioner is a mere employee of one of the sand supplier namely R.K. Murthy, who is the elder brother of this petitioner/accused No. 3 in connection with the said FIR. The petitioner further states that the petitioner is working as an employee of his brother namely R.K. Murthy, who is a businessman selling sand to the businessman and contractors and other interested persons. In a routine manner of sales, he delivered sand to one Moulubi from Lilong and the price of the sand is Rs. 93,000/- (Rupees Ninety three thousand) only per loaded truck/Tata TC having having only 10 tyres and the said Moulubi has given a sum of Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen thousand) only as advance money out of Rs. 93,000/- only for the said delivery of sand on 06.04.2019 with a promise to pay the remaining amount but on the said date the petitioner arrested by the police personnel of NAB by calling him from Lalambung, Imphal as he was coming from his rented house at Lalambung, Imphal to visit his family members. Since on the said date on 06.04.2019 at 4:10 p.m. the petitioner was arrested. 4. Though as an employee of his elder brother namely, R.K. Murthy he had a contact with the said Moulubi for the purpose of collecting the remaining money for the sale of one truck load of sand as the said sand was delivered to the said Moulubi on the advance payment of Rs. 4. Though as an employee of his elder brother namely, R.K. Murthy he had a contact with the said Moulubi for the purpose of collecting the remaining money for the sale of one truck load of sand as the said sand was delivered to the said Moulubi on the advance payment of Rs. 15,000/- but after the arrest, the petitioner was remanded into the judicial custody by the duty Magistrate on 07.4.2019 for 8(eight) days. Thereafter, it was extended for 15 days. The petitioner being the sole bread earner in his family and looking after his two minor daughters aged about 8(eight) and 5(five) years. 5. For the arrest of the petitioner, he moved before the learned Special Judge, N.D. & P.S. Imphal West, Manipur for bail on 15.04.2019 and the same was rejected on 20.04.2019. Therefore, the petitioner is approaching this Court and filed this bail application for granting bail. 6. For the petition for bail filed by the petitioner, the respondent Officer-In-charge of Narcotics and Affairs of Border Police Station, Manipur filed an affidavit-in-opposition by stating that on 06.04.2019 at 5:50 pm the complainant SI Vikram Kh. Lodged a written report to OC/NAB PS stating that on that day i.e. on 06.04.2019 at 1:30 pm while he was at NAB PS, one source man came and reported that some quantity WY tablets is to be transported by one individual namely Konjengbam Nandabir Singh aged about 39 years at ISBT campus Khuman Lampak. Accordingly, the statement was recorded from source man in written and submitted a similar copy to SP/NAB Manipur for kind information for necessary action. Thereafter, he along with the source man and a team of NAB PS led by Addl. SP Th. Brinda and OC B. Rishikesh Sharma with necessary equipments rushed towards the ISBT, Khuman Lampak area without obtaining search authorisation as there was great chance of escape of the offenders and diverting the drugs. On reaching inside the campus of ISBT, Khuman Lampak at around 2:30 pm, he saw two persons who were standing between one Maruti car, silky silver in colour and one Bolero pickup along with one star cement bag as indicated by the source man. Then, the suspected individual was detained at the spot. S.I. Vikram identified Kh. himself from the team as Police Personnel of NAB-PS. Then, the suspected individual was detained at the spot. S.I. Vikram identified Kh. himself from the team as Police Personnel of NAB-PS. Then, called upon two civilian passerby to stand as witnesses while he performed some legal formalities after disclosing his identity. 7. He further states that on his request, the two civil witnesses also agreed to stand as witnesses. On verification, the detainees disclosed their identities as (i) Konjengbam Nandabir Singh (39) years S/o K. Sanatomba Singh of Sawombung, PO-Lamlong PS-Lamlai, Imphal East District, Manipur and (ii) Kharibam Boy Singh (40) years s/o. of Kh. Gopal Singh of Sawombung Thongkhong PO-Lamlong P.S. Lamlai, Imphal East District Manipur. Then in the presence of the witnesses, as per section 50 of ND&PS Act, the detainee were informed verbally as well as in writing about their legal right to search their body and belongings in presence of a Magistrate or a gazetted officer since they were suspected to posses some narcotic drugs or psychotropic substances. In the presence of two witnesses, the complainant has conducting search of body and belongings. On searching the STAR cement bag which was kept near the Maruti car, found 6(six) Nos. of packets of similar shape and size wrapped with yellowish colour cello tape and marked all the six packet as 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 for identification. Then, in presence of the two civil witnesses, the packet marked I was opened and found 10 bundles of small size blue colour plastic packets wrapped with creamy colour paper, and each bundles contains 5(five) small plastic packets i.e. 10 x 5 = 50 packets. On counting each small packets contains 200 numbers each red colour tablets i.e. 200 x 50 = 10,000. 8. The I.O. further states that likewise on counting packets marked 2, 3, 4 & 5 all the packets contains 10,000 tablets each (total 50,000 in 5 packets) and on counting the packet marked 6 found to contain 4 bundles (4 x 10 = 40) and 4 small packets, and each packets contains 200 Nos. each of red tablets i.e. 200 x 44 = 8,800 tablets with a total number of 58,800 WY tablets. Then, he extract l(one) tablets each from each packet marked 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 & 6 for testing with the testing kit and the same gave a positive result of Amphetamine (WY). each of red tablets i.e. 200 x 44 = 8,800 tablets with a total number of 58,800 WY tablets. Then, he extract l(one) tablets each from each packet marked 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 & 6 for testing with the testing kit and the same gave a positive result of Amphetamine (WY). Further conducted the weighing of the detected drugs by using a weighing scale brought by them and found to be 0.1 grams per tablets i.e. 0.1 x 58,794 = 5,8794 kgs. Since all the detected tablets are of same positive results and same shape and size, then he put all the tablets inside one big plastic packet and mixes together properly i.e. 58,794 tablets and marked as “A”. Then in presence of the witnesses he extract 20(twenty) Nos. of WY tablets and divided into two equal parts i.e. 10 tablets each and put inside two separate transparent plastic packet and again put inside two yellow paper envelope properly packed and sealed with wax and marked as A1, A2 as original and duplicate samples. Then the remaining WY tablets i.e. 58,774-after extracting the samples and the blue plastic packets were put inside one carton box wrapped with white cloth properly sealed by using wax and marked as “A” as parent exhibit. Again I put all the creamy colour paper, one STAR Cement bag and cello tape inside on carton bag and marked as B as exhibit. 9. The Officer-in-charge further states that in the presence of two witnesses and at 2:50 pm they seized 53,794 nos of WY tablets including other materials. Later on, on the spot interrogation of the accused persons they disclosed that the seized drugs were delivered by one Moulubi of Lilong and one Sundaram R.K., the petitioner/accused No. 3 herein now they are staying at the rented house of one Tomba Singh near MM Gas Godown Lamphelpat, Imphal West District. Immediately the complainant along with the team and the witnesses rushed to the rented house at Lamphelpat and at around 4:10 pm of the day seized (i) one Adhar card No. 4710 7157 6918 in respect of Sundaram RK (ii) One driving license No. TN0320080008334 in respect of Sundaram RK issued by RTO, Chennai (N-E), Chennai-81(iii) One Election ID card No. TWT0198747 in respect of Sundaram and (iv) one black colour wallet containing Rs. 1650/- (500 x 2,200 x 2,50 x 1,20 x 5) were seized from the possession of Sundaram R.K. (36) S/o. Krishnan of 74/37 Karimdu colony 1st street Viyasarpadi, Chennai, Tamilnadu-600039 at present Moreh Ward No. 4 now staying at a rented house of Tomba Singh near MM Gas Godown Lamphelpat, Imphal West District by preparing a seizure memo. Similarly at 4:15 pm of the day arrested him by furnishing an arrest memo. 10. In the counter affidavit, the Officer-in-charge informed that on interrogation of the accused person, Mr. Sundaram RK, the petitioner herein admitted that he accompanied Moloubi on instruction to ISBT, Khuman Lampak on that fateful day and met the two arrested persons while delivering the STAR cement bags. Therefore, the investigating officer states that the petitioner was arrested on that day but except the seizer of Adhaar Card and other things, no contraband was seized from this petitioner. Therefore, the accused petitioner is involved in the commission of crime and the investigation at the initial stage and absconding prosecution is yet to get arrested. Therefore, releasing the petitioner/accused No. 3 at this stage will hamper the investigation. Therefore, the respondent police seeks to dismissing the bail petition filed by the petitioner. 11. Today, when the matter is taken up, I have heard Mr. N. Jotendro, learned senior counsel for the petitioner and Mr. H. Samarjit, learned Public prosecutor and perused the records. 12. The counsel for the petitioner argued that when on 06.04.2019, the petitioner was arrested and searched his house except the Aadhaar Card, driving licence and other materials, there was no contraband was seized from the petitioner. Now, the petitioner is in judicial custody from 06.04.2019 and almost the entire investigation was completed and the charge-sheet also filed before the Court concerned. 13. For supporting the petitioner's case the learned counsel for the petitioner has produced judgment and order passed by the Punjab & Haryana High Court in a case of Lakkwinder Singh Vs. State of Haryana in case No. CRM No. M-11980 of 2016 (O & M), date of decision 21.04.2016 before this Court and the presented that as per the above judgment and Order if no recovery was made from the accused persons, the Court ought to have considered and the accused is entitled to the benefit of bail. State of Haryana in case No. CRM No. M-11980 of 2016 (O & M), date of decision 21.04.2016 before this Court and the presented that as per the above judgment and Order if no recovery was made from the accused persons, the Court ought to have considered and the accused is entitled to the benefit of bail. On fair reading of the above judgment produced by the learned counsel for the petitioner, it states as follows:- “6. The petitioner is not stated to be involved in any other case under the NDPS Act.” 7. No recovery having been effected from the present petitioner, this Court is of the considered view that he is entitled to the benefit of bail.” 14. Admittedly, either in the counter affidavit filed by the respondent or the Public Prosecutor has not stated so that the contraband was seized from this petitioner/accused No. 3 whereas the entire contrabands namely 58,794 number of WY tablets were seized from the accused No. 1 & 2 only. In the counter affidavit also, it was clearly mentioned that the contrabands of WY tablets were seized only from accused No. 1 & 2 and not from the accused but it was alleged that the contrabands were supplied only by this petitioner/accused No. 3 & 4 to the accused No. 1 & 2. Except the statement alleged to be given by the accused person, there was no other statements were mentioned in the counter affidavit that this petitioner along with the 4th (fourth) accused were supplied this contraband of WY tablets numbering 58,794 tablets. 15. Apart from this, as per the order of the Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court produced by the learned counsel for the petitioner it is made clear that there is no contraband seized from this accused No. 3 at any point of time. Apart from this, the petitioner is in judicial custody from 06.04.2019 for almost 2(two) months. 16. It is admitted fact that the contraband was huge quantity but the same were recovered from the accused No. 1 & 2 only. Apart from this, the petitioner is in judicial custody from 06.04.2019 for almost 2(two) months. 16. It is admitted fact that the contraband was huge quantity but the same were recovered from the accused No. 1 & 2 only. This petitioner is in judicial custody from 06.04.2019 and the entire investigation is almost over which was reported by the prosecution, I am inclined to grant bail only on the ground by considering this two grounds only for the purpose of granting bail that he is in custody from 06.04.2019 and no contraband was seized from this petitioner/accused No. 3 since there is no record as on date. 17. In the result: (a) The bail petition filed by the petitioner is allowed. (b) The petitioner is directed to be released on bail by executing a surety for a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- (one lakh) with two sureties each like sum of the same to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judge, ND & PS, Manipur, Imphal. (c) The petitioner is directed to report before the respondent police daily at 10:00 am until further order. (d) The petitioner is directed not to tamper or hamper the witnesses or document.