SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2014 Supreme(P&H) 81

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
[DIVISION BENCH]
Before
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice S.S. Saron
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice S.P. Bangarh
CRM No. M-13140 of 2012
Inderjeet Singh @ Laddi
v.
State of Punjab
{Decided on 31/01/2014}

Advocates:
For the Petitioner in CRM No. M-13140 of 2012:Mr. J.S. Arora, Advocate.
For the Petitioner in CRM No.M-1379 of 2013:Mr. P.S. Ahluwalia, Advocate.
For the Petitioner in CRM No. M-14461 of 2012:Mr. Shashikant Gupta, Advocate for Mr. L.M. Gulati, Advocate.
For the Petitioner in CRM No.M-20282 of 2012:Mr. P.S. Sekhon, Advocate.
Mr. D.S. Pheruman, Advocate, Mr. R.K. Gupta, Advocate, Mr. Parveen Kataria, Advocate and Mr. Akshay Jain, Advocate as interveners.
Mr. PPS Thethi, Addl. A.G., Punjab in Crl. Misc. Nos. M-13140, 14461 and 20282 of 2012.
Mr. S.S. Dhaliwal, Addl. A.G., Punjab in CRM No. M-1379 of 2013

Headnote:Narcotics--Anticipatory Bail--Where the matter is being unnecessarily delayed, Court may grant interim bail till the receipt of the FSL report.

       Narcotics--Manufactured Drugs--Mere fact that the drugs which are covered under ‘manufactured drugs’ under the NDPS Act and the NDPS Rules and are also covered by the D&C Act and the 1945 Rules thereunder would not mean that the offender can be penalised only under the D&C Act and the 1945 Rules and not proceeded against the NDPS Act and the NDPS Rules.

       Narcotics--Manufactured Drugs--Contravention of manufactured drug or possession of quantity in bulk is to be taken into consideration and not per dosage.

       Narcotics--Manufactured Drugs--Mere dosage of the manufactured drug in one capsule is not to be considered but the dosage in the number of capsules together is to be considered.

       Narcotics--Manufactured Drugs--Recovery of the bulk quantity from an unauthorized person would be indicative of the fact that it was not being used for medicinal or therapeutic purposes.

       (A) Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, S.21--Anticipatory Bail--Narcotics--Held; the presiding officer of a Special Court dealing with NDPS cases wherever the need is felt and where the matter is being unnecessarily delayed may grant interim bail till the receipt of the FSL report and thereafter consider the case after the receipt of the report--Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.438. (Para 55)

       (B) Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, S.21--Manufactured drugs--Held; the mere fact that the drugs which are covered under ‘manufactured drugs’ under the NDPS Act and the NDPS Rules and psychotropic substances as mentioned in Schedule of the NDPS Act and Schedule I of the NDPS Rules and are also covered by the D&C Act and the 1945 Rules thereunder would not mean that the offender can be penalised only under the D&C Act and the 1945 Rules and not proceeded against the NDPS Act and the NDPS Rules--In case there is a contravention of the NDPS Act and the NDPS Rules, the stringent provisions of the Rules can be resorted to--Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940. (Para 56)

       (C) Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, S.21--Manufactured drugs--Held; the contravention of manufactured drug or possession of quantity in bulk is to be taken into consideration and not per dosage specially when there is a violation of the D&C Act and the 1945 Rules that is to say they are sold, purchased, distributed, stored, transported, carried etc. without a valid licence or kept without a valid authorization--Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940. (Para 56)

       (D) Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, S.21--Manufactured drugs--Held; mere dosage of the manufactured drug in one capsule is not to be considered but the dosage in the number of capsule together is to be considered for determining as to whether the exceptions provided in the notification dated 14.11.1985 declaring the narcotic substance and preparations as mentioned therein to be manufactured drugs--Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940. (Para 56)

       (E) Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, S.21--Manufactured drugs--Held; A person possessing manufactured drugs in terms of the NDPS Act and the NDPS Rules is to strictly adhere to the provisions relating to sale, purchase, transport, carrying, storage, distribution etc. in accordance with the provisions of the D&C Act and the 1945 Rules as also the provisions of the Punjab NDPS Rules 2012--Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940. (Para 56)

       (F) Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, S.21--Manufactured drugs--Held; the bulk quantity, in respect of which there is a contravention or is recovered from an unauthorized person would be indicative of the fact that it was not being used for medicinal or therapeutic purposes but as a drug to sedate or for intoxication or to give a sharp stimulating effect to get an unhealthy thrill so as to get a ‘kick’--Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940. (Para 44)

JUDGMENT

Mr. S.S. Saron, J.: - This order will dispose of references made by the learned Single Judge in Inderjeet Singh @ Laddi v. State of Punjab CRM No.M- 13140; Ravinder Singh @ Rinku v. State of Punjab CRM No. M-1379 of 2013; Rani v. State of Punjab CRM No. M-14461 of 2012 and Mohd. Shamshad v. State of Punjab CRM No. M-20282 of 2012.

2. In Inderjeet Singh @ Laddi v. State of Punjab (Crl. Misc. No. M-13140 of 2012), the petitioner was apprehended with the following ‘manufactured drugs’ as per the report of the Forensic Science Laboratory (“FSL” - for short):-

a) 30 Rexcof bottles containing 5.88 gms of codeine.

b) 1500 Momolit of tablets containing 3.45 gms of diphenoxylate.

c) 500 Phenotil tablets containing 1.1 gms diphenoxylate.

d) 150 Parvon Spas capsules containing 9.70 gms of dextropropoxyphene.

3. It is contended on behalf of the petitioner on the strength of two judgments of this Court in Baljit Singh v. State of Punjab, 2003 (1) Criminal Court Cases 4 (P&H) and Manjit Singh v. State of Punjab, [2011(2) Law Herald (P&H) 1542] : 2011 (1) RCR (Crl.) 907 (P&H) that the substances allegedly recovered from the petitioner being ‘manufactured drugs’ do not come within the purview of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (“NDPS Act” - for short) and the petitioner can at best be prosecuted and tried for the offences, if any, under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 (“D&C Act” - for short).

4. On behalf of the State it is contended that the substances recovered from the petitioner or in respect of which there has been a contravention are ‘manufactured drugs’ covered by the provisions of Section 2 (xi) NDPS Act and in view of the FSL report, their prosecution and trial for committing an offence under the NDPS Act is maintainable.

5. The learned Single Judge after considering the rival contentions found that the question whether such substances/drugs are covered under the NDPS Act or not, or can be dealt with only under the D&C Act has been arising frequently in many cases. The consequences would be completely different if the substances were held to be within the purview of the D&C Act instead of the NDPS Act. The matter was, therefore, referred to a larger bench. Meanwhile, the petitioner was ordered to be released on interim bail to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate, Ludhiana.

6. In Ravinder Singh @ Rinku v. State of Punjab (CRM No. M- 1379 of 2013), the petitioner was apprehended with Parvon-Spas capsules. As per the Chemical Examiner’s report (Annexure P-2) after chemical examination various ingredients along with quantity found in the recovery that was effected as per analysis report is as follows:-

Dextropropoxyphene Hcl. Positive

Dicyclomine Hcl. Positive

Acetaminophen Positive

Avg. Wt. 0.648 gms

Avg. net content 0.496 gms

Assay for -

Dextropropoxyphene Hcl. 61.986 mg/cap

Acetaminophen 381.76 mg/cap

Dicyclomine Hcl. 9.535 mg/cap.

7. The Chemical Examiner in his report opined that as per the observations made by the analyst, the samples contain Dextropropoxyphene Hcl., Acetaminophen, Dicyclomine Hcl. In the Chemical Examiner report (Annexure P-3), the examination was conducted in respect of white coloured round flat uncoated tablet inscribed with Micron on one side and having plain surface on other packed in loose polythene pouch. The contents of the parcels under reference were analyzed separately by Chemical analysis and on the basis of analysis, the various ingredients along with quantity found present in these had been described as follows as per analysis report:-

Diphenoxylate Hcl. Positive

Avg. Wt. 0.0741 gms

Assay for -

Diphenoxylate Hcl. 2.445 mg/Tab

8. As per observations made by the analyst the sample contained Diphenoxylate Hcl.

9. In his application for bail it is contended on behalf of the petitioner Ravinder Singh @ Rinku that insofar as the recovery of Dextropropoxyphene and Diphenoxylate is concerned, both of them would fa













































































































































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top