A prima facie case is sufficient for framing charges, and the burden of proof lies on the accused to establish lack of connection to the contraband.

ORDER

1. In wake of second surge in the COVID-19 cases, abundant caution is being maintained, while hearing the matters in Court, for the safety of all concerned

2. This criminal revision petition under Section 397 read with Section 401 Cr.P.C. has been preferred claiming the following relief:

"It is, therefore, most humbly and respectfully prayed that this revision petition may kindly be allowed and impugned order dated 13.08.2021 passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Jaitaran District Pali in Sessions Case No.02/2020 may kindly be quashed and set aside and the petitioner may kindly be ordered to be discharged from the offence under Section 8/15 read with Section 25 of N.D.P.S. Act."

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that on 03.09.2018, on National Highway No.458 near Chavandiya Kalian, a Honda City Car bearing registration No. DL 3C AK 7476, on the basis of secret information, was searched by the Station House Officer, Police Station, Jaitaran, District Pali, in which three plastic bags containing 35 kgs. 100 gms. of poppy straw was found, and accordingly, the said car alongwith the contraband was seized; on the basis of the said search and seizure, an FIR bearing No.365/2018 was registered at Police Station Jaitaran, District Pali for the offence under Section 8/15 of the NDPS Act.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that thereafter, upon completion of the investigation, a charge-sheet was filed against the petitioner for the offences under Sections 8/15 & 25 of the NDPS Act, whereafter, the charges against the present petitioner were framed by the learned trial court vide the impugned order dated 13.08.2021, and hence, the petitioner has preferred this revision petition challenging the said order of framing of charges.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submitted that there was absolutely no evidence against the present petitioner so as to connect him with the alleged crime. Learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner was not in physical possession of the contraband in question, and was also not aware of usage of the aforesaid Honda City car for committing the crime in question, as he had already sold the said car prior to the alleged incident.

6. Learned counsel further submitted that the offence under Section 8/15 read with Section 25 of the NDPS Act was not made out against the present petitioner, as he was not the registered owner of the car in question.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submitted that the petitioner had sold the car in question on 02.07.2018 to one Surendra Singh, who was the proprietor of Golden Motors, and obtained a delivery receipt towards such sale, and subsequently, Surendra Singh sold the said car to accused-Mukesh Kumar, who was apprehended, while transporting the poppy straw in the car.

8. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that since the minimum connection itself was not being established between the present petitioner and the contraband in question, therefore, the filing of charge-sheet and framing of the charges against the present petitioner were unlawful.

9. Learned Public Prosecutor however, opposes the revision petition.

10. After hearing learned counsel for the parties as well as on a careful examination of the record of the case, alongwith the impugned order passed by the learned trial court, this Court finds that the learned trial court has taken into consideration the fact that the car in question was registered in the name of the present petitioner, though the petitioner claimed that he had sold the said car on 02.07.2018, even before the alleged incident, which had happened on 03.09.2018.

11. This Court also finds that the learned trial court has also taken into consideration that the petitioner, during the course of investigation, had never produced even a single document to prove that the vehicle in question had been sold by him to Surendra Singh; however, subsequently, he prepared a different story. The learn