Back
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
DR. RAJESH KUMAR GUPTA – Appellant
Versus
STATE AND ANOTHER – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. quashing criminal proceedings based on procedural history. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. arguments on medical use exemptions under n.d.p.s. act. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 3. court analysis on n.d.p.s. provisions and exemption conditions. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24) |
| 4. application dismissed based on lack of sufficient evidence. (Para 25 , 26) |
JUDGMENT :
ALOK MAHRA, J.
1.The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been preferred by the applicant, seeking quashing of entire proceedings of S.S.T. No. 26 of 2004, arising out of Case Crime No. 303 of 2004, registered under Sections 224& 420 of the Indian Penal Code, and Section 8 read with Section 22 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 and Section 4 read with Section 7 of the Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 1954, (for short‘Drugs and Magic Remedies Act’), registered at Police Station Rishikesh, District Dehradun.
2. Facts, giving rise to the present application, are that, on 03.08.2004, the premises of Neeraj Clinic Private Limited, of which the applicant is Director, was raided by the police team. During the course of raid
The accused must prove that dealing in psychotropic substances meets legal standards for medical or scientific use, including adherence to licensing requirements, as outlined in the N.D.P.S. Act.
Quashing of an FIR under Section 482 is permissible only in rare cases where no cognizable offence is disclosed, emphasizing strict adherence to procedural regulations in narcotic related cases.
Possession of Alprazolam without complying with the registration requirement under the NDPS Act is in contravention of the law, and ignorance of the law is not an excuse.
The accused must satisfy the twin conditions under Entry 35 of the Notification and produce necessary evidence of engagement in therapeutic practice for medical or scientific purposes to overcome the....
The court held that possession of narcotic drugs in significant quantities under NDPS Act warrants stringent bail conditions, emphasizing the necessity of statutory compliance regarding search and se....
Narcotics – Bail – Commercial Quantity – If a person keeps commercial quantity of the psychotropic substance falling under the schedule, he is not entitled to the benefit of Section 37 of the Act irr....
Possession of cough syrup containing codeine qualifies as a narcotic under the NDPS Act, with strict bail conditions imposed that were not satisfied in this case.
No person shall sell, purchase, consume or use any psychotropic substance except in accordance with Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945 Provided that sale, purchase, consumption or use of a psychotropic ....
The court held that the provisions of the NDPS Act apply alongside the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, and bail under Section 37 of the NDPS Act requires clear grounds for believing the accused is not guilt....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
