Back
2012 Supreme(P&H) 1352
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR, J.
Ajay Kumar - Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and others - Respondents
CRM No.M-32610 of 2012(O&M)
Decided on : 15.10.2012
Mr. Premjit Singh Hundal, Senior Advocate, with Ms. Manu Loona, Advocate, for the petitioner.
The exact quantity of seized narcotic drugs and the compliance of manufacturers, chemists, and wholesale license holders with the NDPS Act are crucial in determining the offense, and possession of narcotic drugs by such entities requires compliance with the NDPS Act.
Headnote:
Narcotic Drugs - Bail Petition - The Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (Sections 21/22/61/85)
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner was found in possession of a large quantity of narcotic drugs without a valid permit or license. The petitioner sought regular bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
Finding of the Court:
The court found no merit in the petitioner's argument that the recovery of commercial quantity of drugs was not duly proved and dismissed the bail petition.
Issues: The court considered whether the quantity of contraband seized and the compliance of manufacturers, chemists, and wholesale license holders under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 with the provisions of the NDPS Act were relevant in the case.
Ratio Decidendi: The court referred to previous judgments to establish that the exact quantity of the narcotic drugs seized and the compliance of manufacturers, chemists, and wholesale license holders with the NDPS Act were crucial in determining the offense and that the possession of narcotic drugs by such entities required compliance with the NDPS Act.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the petitioner's bail petition, emphasizing the need to curb the increasing tendency and frequency of selling narcotic drugs in the region.
MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR, J.(oral)
Concisely, the facts and material, culminating in the commencement, relevant for disposal of the instant petition for bail and emanating from the record are that, on 11.07.2012, in the wake of secret information, complainant-Mrs. Vijay Rani, Drug Control Officer and Mr. M.K. Bhadu, SMO, formed a raiding-party and conducted the search of the premises of Sharma Medical Agency, Dabwali, and recovered the following Narcotic drugs:-
S.No. Name of the Medicine Quantity(total)
1. Microlet tablets 15000
2. Lomotil tablets 20000
3. Rexcof syrup 480 bottles
4. Lupigesic injections 400
5. Unizocine injections 550
6. Zocin injections 900
7. Spasmocip capsules 1200
8. ZZZ tablets 1000
9. Zepose 10 Mg. 5000 tablets
10. Zepose 5 Mg. 3500 tablets
11. Decalm 10 Mg. 3150 tablets
12. Decalm 5 Mg. 700 tablets
13. Spasmocip Plus 3300 capsules
14. Rest 0.5 32400 tablets
15. Parvon Spas 6800 capsules
16. Anxipam 1100 tablets
17. Dexovon 390 capsules
18. Antipam 2 Mg. 94000 tablets
19. Spasmo Plus 6000 tablets
20. Unizocine injections (1 ml) 1000
21. Spasmo proxyon 6912 capsules
22. Spasmo 720 capsules
23. Spasmo Cip Plus 2700 capsules
24. Unizocine injections 200
25. Provon Fort 100 capsules
26. Fortvin injections 96
27. Momolit tablets 44000
28. Prozolam 0.5 Mg. 35400
29. Provon Spas capsules 21780
30. Pheuolit tablets 10000
31. Tranax 5600
32. Alto 0.5 Mg.tablets 8800
33. Spazpmoci Plus capsules 7200
34. Parvodex capsules 2000
35. Alto 0.5 Mg.tablets 144000
36. Proxyvon capsules 2160
37. Parvon capsules 2304
38. Altipam-2 tablets 78000
39. Corex syrup 25000 bottles
40. Fhenoltil tablets 25000
41. Alto 0.5 tablets 90400
42. Luzapalm tablets 5000
43. Rexcaf cough syrup (602 ml) 2880 bottles
44. Rexcaf cough syrup (100 ml) 480 bottles
45. Rexcaf cough syrup (100 ml) 3840 bottles
46. Kilcaf(100 ml) 330 bottles
47. Kilcaf(10 ml) 5 bottles
2. According to the complainant that, she demanded the relevant stock register and sale record etc., but the accused could not produce the same. Having completed all the codal formalities of taking the samples etc., the samples & remaining drugs were sealed into separate parcels and taken into possession vide recovery memos in the presence of the witnesses.
3. Levelling a variety of allegations and narrating the sequence of events, in all, the prosecution claimed that a huge catch of the indicated Narcotic drugs were recovered from the possession of the accused, without any valid permit, licence or relevant record. In the background of aforesaid allegations and in pursuance of the aforesaid recovery, the present criminal case was registered against the accused including the petitioner, by means of FIR No.288 dated 11.07.2012, on accusation of having committed the offences punishable under Sections 21/22/61/85 of The Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter to be referred as “the Act”), by the police of Police Station City Mandi Dabwali, District Sirsa.
4. Having exercised and lost his right of bail before the Sessions Judge, now the petitioner-accused has preferred the instant petition for regular bail in the indicated criminal case, invoking the provisions of Section 439 Cr.P.C.
5. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, going through the record with his valuable assistance and after considering the entire matter deeply, to my mind, there is no merit in the instant petition in this context.
6. Ex facie, the arguments of the learned counsel that, since the manufactured drugs were recovered, no pointed offences are made out and moreover, the recovery of commercial quantity of drugs is not duly proved, so, the petitioner is entitled to the concession of regular bail, are not only devoid of merit but misconceived as well.
7. As is evident from the record that, huge and commercial quantity of the above-mentioned Narcotic dru
