The main legal point established is that the absence of evidence connecting the accused with the alleged offence, combined with the lack of recovery from the accused, can justify the quashment of FIR and criminal proceedings.

JUDGMENT

Pranay Verma, J. - Heard on the question of admission.

2. By this petition preferred under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (herein after referred to as the Code), the petitioner has prayed for quashment of the First Information Report (FIR) bearing Crime No.126/2022 registered at Police Station Narayangarh, District Mandsaur (MP); and criminal proceedings pending in the Court of Additional Special Judge (under NDPS Act), Mandsaur, District Mandsaur (MP) in Special Sessions Trial No.94/2022.

3. It is alleged that the petitioner was also involved in the aforesaid case along with other co-accused persons wherein 110 kilograms of contraband (poppy straw) has been seized by the Police.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the implication of the petitioner is solely on the basis of memo of co-accused Lal Singh recorded under Section 27 of the Evidence Act. It is the co-accused from which the recovery has been made, but no recovery has been made from the applicant. There is no direct or indirect evidence, whatsoever, to connect him with the present crime. The entire material of the charge sheet, even if taken to be true, does not disclose commission of any offence by the petitioner. The continuance of the proceedings against the petitioner would be an exercise in futility. On such grounds, it is stated that the proceedings against the petitioner be quashed.

5. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent / State, on the other hand, has opposed the prayer, however, it is not denied that apart from memo under Section 27 of the Evidence Act, there is no other material available on record to connect the petitioner with the offence; and it is also not denied that the recovery has been made from the co-accused Lal Singh and not from the petitioner.

6. From perusal of the entire charge sheet, it does not appear that besides memo of co-accused recorded under Section 27 of the Evidence Act, there is any other material on record against the petitioner. No recovery has been made from him, which recovery has been made from the co-accused. There are no call details even available to connect the applicant and the other co-accused. The entire charge sheet, even if taken to be true, at this stage, does not disclose commission of any offence by the petitioner. Hence, continuance of the proceedings against him would be an abuse of process of the Court.

7. For the reasons, as aforesaid, Miscellaneous Criminal Case No.13683/2023 is allowed and the FIR registered at Crime No.126/2022 as well as the proceedings pending before the Court of Additional Special Judge (under NDPS Act), Mandsaur, District Mandsaur (MP) whereby charges have been framed against the petitioner for offence punishable under Section 8 (C) read with Section 15 (C) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 are hereby quashed. The petitioner is discharged from the aforementioned charges; and the subsequent proceedings relating to the aforesaid crime number registered against the petitioner are also quashed.