Point of Law: sub-section (2) of section 55 is also very relevant to be mentioned here, it says that for the purposes of section 156 of Cr P.C, the area in regard to which an Inspector of Excise or Sub-Inspector of Excise or an Excise Officer empowered under sub-section (1) of section 55 shall be deemed to be a police station.

ORDER :

The facts in brief are that on 30.7.2020, the Intelligence Officer of Narcotic Control Bureau (NCB), the respondent herein, received information that the Foreign Post Office, Bengaluru, had received a parcel which was addressed to one Kartik Pramod. The information given to the Intelligence Officer was that the parcel contained MDMA tablets. The officers of the NCB went to the Post Office and seized the parcel by writing a panchanama on 30.7.2020. When they opened the parcel, they found it containing 142 grams of MDMA. They tracked the addressee and came to know that the petitioner was the real receiver of the parcel. The petitioner is a student of engineering at NITTE, Karkala. He was not available as the college had been closed due to Covid-19. On 8.8.2020, the petitioner came to college to attend the examination which was scheduled to commence from 16.8.2020. The NCB officers questioned the petitioner about the parcel and he denied his knowledge about it. Thereafter, the NCB officers interrogated accused 2 to 4. Since they found inconsistency in their statements, they subjected the petitioner again for interrogation on 23.9.2020. Thereafter he was arrested and produced before the court with remand application on 25.9.2020.

2. After remand of the petitioner to judicial custody on 25.9.2020, the NCB officers had to file the charge sheet within 180 days, but it was not filed till 24.3.2021. Therefore, the petitioner got filed an application under section 167(2) of Cr.P.C. Later on the petitioner came to know that the respondent, instead of filing a charge sheet under section 173(2) of Cr.P.C, had filed a complaint before the Special Court on 19.3.2021. The Special Court took cognizance of the offences alleged in the complaint by making an endorsement on the complaint itself as “cognizance taken”. After taking cognizance, the Special Court passed an order dated 24.3.2021 issuing process to the petitioner and on 7.4.2021, passed another order rejecting his application filed under section 167(2) of Cr.P.C. Therefore, the petitioner has filed this Writ Petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India read with section 482 of Cr.P.C for quashing the order of taking cognizance dated 19.3.2021, the order of issuing process dated 24.3.2021 and rejecting his application under section 167(2) of Cr.P.C on 7.4.2021.

3. I have heard the arguments of Sri Hashmath Pasha, learned senior counsel for the petitioner and Sri Madhukar Deshpande, learned standing counsel for the NCB.

4. The main thrust of argument of Sri Hashmath Pasha was that the petitioner was remanded to judicial custody on 24.9.2020, and 180 days, the time specified for filing the charge sheet according to section 36A(4) of NDPS Act expired on 23.3.2021. No charge sheet was filed within 180 days. Therefore the petitioner was entitled to be released on bail according to section 167(2) of Cr.P.C. It is an indefeasible right of the accused to be released on bail if charge sheet is not filed within the specified time. Surprisingly, the petitioner came to know that the respondent had filed a complaint before the Special Court on 19.3.2021. In fact the petitioner got filed an application under section 167(2) of Cr.P.C., but the learned Special Judge rejected the said application as according to him, complaint had been filed on 19.3.2021 within the period of 180 days from the date of remand of the petitioner to the judicial custody.

4.1. Sri Hashmath Pasha elaborated his argument by submitting that the respondent is invested with the powers of an officer in charge of a police station for the purpose of investigation of the offences under the NDPS Act. For this reason, the respondent, given the powers of station house officer for the purpose of investigation, is a police officer for all practical purposes and he should have filed charge sheet according to section 173(2) of Cr.P.C, he had no authority to make a complaint as has been done in this case. The procedure a