the travellers therein have been implicated in the case in saying that they had kept those begs for facilitating the transportation of ganja. It is his submission that the recovery of the bags having made from the dickey of the bus, in the absence of any acceptable material to show that this Petitioner had kept those bags in that dickey before he boarded the bus; his knowledge as to keeping of those bags said to contain ganja is not at all inferable. He also submits that in the meantime, the wife of this Petitioner and driver of the bus have been released on bail. Accordingly, it is stated that the bar contained in section 37 of the NDPS Act does not stand on the way of grant of bail to the Petitioner. In view of all these above, when there remains no scope on the part of the Petitioner to flee from justice and tamper the evidence and as he has no such criminal antecedent; he urges for grant of bail to the Petitioner. 4. Learned counsel for the State opposes the move in view of the quantity of ganja seized. He, however, does not dispute the position that the recovery of bags containing ganja has been made from the dickey of the bus when this Petitioner is said to travelling as a passenger therein.
