Commitment of distinct offences requires separate charges under the Cr.P.C., as failure to comply leads to procedural invalidity of prosecution.

JUDGMENT :

MILIND N. JADHAV, J.

1. Interim Application No.1074 OF 2024 was filed for condonation of delay in filing Criminal Revision Application No.183 of 2024. This Court, by an order dated 20.03.2024 (Coram: S.M. MODAK, J.) has condoned the delay.

2. This is a Revision Application filed under Section 397 r/w Section 401 of Cr.P.C. [The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973] challenging orders dated 04.07.2023 and 07.10.2023 passed by the Special Judge rejecting the Discharge Application and a subsequent Clarification Application preferred by Applicant – Accused No.2 below Exhibit 16 and Exhibit 20 respectively in N.D.P.S. Special case No.711 of 2021.

3. According to prosecution case, while on patrolling duty, Police team intercepted Accused No. 1 - Muzammil Shaikh because of his suspicious movement in the parking ground in front of Madina Building, Ahmed Zakaria Nagar, Opp. HDIL Tower, Bandra (E), Mumbai. He was apprehended with 35 grams of alleged contraband Mephedrone (MD). His mobile phone was confiscated. On enquiry, he disclosed to prosecution officers that in the past he had supplied alleged contraband to various persons including Accused No. 2 who is the Revision Applicant.

3.1. From the mobile phone of Accused No. 1, prosecution recovered various WhatsApp messages exchanged between Accused Nos. 1 and 2 which according to prosecution’s case, inter alia, pertain to procurement of alleged contraband in the past. According to prosecution case between 02.07.2019 to January 2021 (18 months), Applicant procured the alleged contraband MD from Accused No. 1 weighing 1 or 2 grams on multiple occasions for which he made payments by 15 different transactions in the denomination ofRs.1,000/- to Rs. 4,000/- totaling to Rs.24,700/-.

3.2. Prosecution case primarily relies on WhatsApp messages in support of its case against Applicant under Section 8(c), 22(b), 27-A and 29 of NDPS Act [The Narcotic Drug and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985]. It is prosecution case that Applicant conspired with Accused No. 1 in trafficking of alleged contraband and liable under the aforesaid 4 provisions of the NDPS Act. Apart from WhatsApp chats depicting messages, it is prosecution case that that over a period of 18 months, Applicant procured 44 grams of alleged contraband and in lieu thereof paid Rs. 24,700/- to Accused No. 1 and in conspiracy with him trafficked the alleged contraband.

4. Mr. Dedhia, Learned APP would submit that Applicant’s name came up in WhatsApp chats of Accused No.1 where it was discovered that Applicant was procuring small quantities of contraband MD on a regular basis. He would submit that Applicant made payments to Accused No.1 in 15 tranches equating to Rs.24,700/- for procuring the contraband. He would submit that although procurement of such small quantity in itself would not constitute an offence but would urge the court to consider recurring nature of transactions of contraband along with WhatsApp chats to assert that Applicant was involved in illicit dealing of contraband also. He would submit that even if no contraband is recovered from possession of Applicant, he aided Accused No.1 to carryout his trade and acting as a channel for transactions and this act would constitute an offence under the NDPS Act. To further his submission, he would submit that Applicant was also instructing Accused No.1, supplier of contraband to deliver contraband to different addresses on recurring basis. To add t