[4.] Mr. Lalbiaknunga Hnamte, learned counsel submits that ever since their arrest, the petitioners have been in custody for the last 140 days and that no charge-sheet has been filed as on date. The learned counsel submits that there was no recovery of the alleged drugs either from the possession of the petitioners or from any other place and that they have been arrested and put in custody solely on the basis of assumption. He submits that the petitioners were initially charge under Section 28 & 29 of the ND&PS Act, which provides for punishment for attempts to commit offences and punishment for abetment and criminal conspiracy respectively. Later on, at the instance of the police, Section 21 (c) of the ND&PS Act was added to the charge. The learned counsel submits that in order to book a person under the aforesaid Section or to add the Section to the charge, there has to be a recovery of the alleged drugs and measurement taken so as to justify invoking of such Section. However, in the instant case, no recovery was made by the police either from the petitioners or from any other place and that the aforesaid Section was added solely on the basis of strong belief that the case involves large quantity of alleged drugs. He therefore submits that invoking the said Section of law without recovery is wholly unjustified and violates the Fundamental Rights of the arrested persons, such as the petitioners. Under the circumstance, the learned counsel submits that the petitioners may be enlarged on
