The court's duty at the stage of taking cognizance is limited to finding out whether the alleged offence is made out from the material placed before it.

Heard the parties.

2. This Cr.M.P. has been flied with prayer to quash/set aside the order taking cognizance dated 20.11.2015. passed by District arid Additional Sessions Judge-II, Chatra as also the entire criminal proceeding in connection with N.D.P.S. No. 43/2015 arising out of Chatra P.S. Case No. 115/2015.

3. The facts in brief is that on 4.4.2015, the Superintendent of Police, Chatra received information that Cannabis was kept in the house of Rajesh Singh (petitioner). Thereafter, on the direction of Superintendent of Police Chatra, the informant Balishwar Singh, Sub-Inspector of Police along with B.D.O. and armed force reached house of Rajesh Singh at around 13:00 hrs. On seeing police party the petitioner fled away. On search in presence of B.D.O. and two independent witnesses, 15.5. Kg. of Ganja kept in 4 different-bags was seized from the entry door of the house and seizure list was prepared. The family members of the petitioner could not produce documents of Cannabis.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that there is no material available oil record against the petitioner and the F.I.R. itself appears to be unbelievable. As per FIR the search and seizure was made in presence of family members of the petitioner but no signature has been obtained on the seizure list, which itself is fatal. Even not a single villager has been brought on, record to be seizure witness rather person of different village namely Hafuwa have been made seizure witness which shakes the credibility of search and seizure. The due procedure of search and seizure under the Act has not been complied. The ingredients of Sections 17 and 18 of NDPS Act are not applicable as the same relates to possession, sell, purchase, transportation etc. of opium and there is no allegation related to opium. Since the mandatory provision of search and seizure have not been complied with and as such prosecution under Sections 20 and 22 of the NDPS Act is not sustainable in the eye of law. The charge-sheet has been submitted without obtaining examination report of alleged article from the Forensic Science Laboratory. It is further contended that the petitioner lives in Ranchi for his livelihood and was not present in his village on the date of occurrence.

5. On the other hand learned counsel appearing for the State has opposed the prayer and submitted that grounds taken for quashing of the impugned order as also entire F.I.R. are not tenable. It is pointed out that after submission of charge-sheet and considering materials available on record the learned Court below has already taken cognizance of the offence against the accused/petitioner.

6. I have gone through the rival submission of the parties as well as documents available on record. No ground of malicious prosecution or vengeance has been brought on record nor the petitioner has been able to discard prima facie materials against him. The Apex Court in the case of Arnanullah v. State of Bihar 2016 (3) East Cr C 51 (SC) : (2016) 6 SCC (Cri) 551 in paragraph-25 has held as under :

"25. A careful reading of the material' placed on record reveals that the learned GJM took cognizance of the offences alleged against the accused persons after a perusal of the case diary, charge-sheet and other material placed before the Court. The cognizance was taken, as a prima facie case was made out against the accused persons. It is well settled that at the stage of taking cognizance, the Court should not get into the merits of the case made out by the police, in the charge-sheet filed by them, with a view to calculate the success rate of prosecution in that particular case. At this stage, the Court's duty is limited to extent of finding out whether from the material placed before it, the offence alleged therein against the accused is made out or not with a view to proceed to further with the case.

26. The proposition of law relating to Section 482, Cr PC has been elaborately dealt with by this Court in Bhajan