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

2024 Supreme(Online)(GAU) 11520

GAHC010027122022 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

Case No. : Crl.Rev.P./60/2022 MAHESH RAY @ ROY S/O LT. RAM DAYAL RAI PRESENT ADDRESS-

PALTAN BAZAR, K.C. SEN ROAD, PIN-781008, DIST. KAMRUP (M), GUWAHATI, ASSAM, PERMANENT ADDRESS-

VILL- GAUSPUR BARIARPUR P.O. CHAKSIKANPUR P.S. RAJAPAKAR DIST. BAISHALI PIN-844115, BIHAR VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND ANR REP. BY NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU.

2:SRI PHANI NARJINARY INTELLIGENCE OFFICER NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU GUWAHATI ZONAL UNIT GUWAHATI Advocate for the Petitioner : MR J I BARBHUIYA Advocate for the Respondent : SC, NCB BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA

ORDER

19.02.2024

1. Heard Mr. J.I. Barbhuiya, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. S.C. Keyal, learned Standing Counsel, Narcotic Control Bureau (NCB).

2. This Criminal Revision Petition has been registered on filing of an application under Section 397/401 the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 by the petitioner, namely, Mahesh Ray @ Roy, impugning the order dated 28.07.2020 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 1, Kamrup(M), Guwahati in NDPS Case No. 81/2019, whereby, charges under Section 21(c)/29 of the NDPS Act, 1985 were framed against the petitioner, Mahesh Ray @Roy.

3. The facts relevant for consideration of the instant criminal revision petition, in brief, are as follows:-

(i) That on 07.05.2019 at around 12:30 PM, Sri Anil Khushwa, Intelligence Officer, Narcotics Control Bureau, Guwahati Zonal Unit received an information regarding carrying of 5 packets of phensedyl cough syrup without proper documentation by some persons, which were kept at Madhur courier Service at Lachit Nagar, Guwahati. Accordingly, a team of officials were constituted and they reached the spot at the given time, i.e., 2:30 PM and intercepted two persons, who came there to pick up the said carton boxes containing cough syrup. On search, it was found that each carton boxes contained 1,000 bottles of codeine based cough syrup. Each carton box contained following numbers of bottles of cough syrup as shown herein below: -

a) P1: 200 Bottles (Batch No. PHB 8353)

b) P2: 200 Bottles (Batch No. PHB8353)

c) P3:180 Bottles (Batch No. PHB8353) d) P4:220 Bottles (Batch No. PHB 8357) e) P5: 200 Bottles (Batch No. PHB 8357)

(ii) The statement of two co-accused, namely, Nirmal Kumar Shah and Jay Shankar Ray were recorded by the Investigating Officer and thereafter, notices were issued to the present petitioner, who appeared before the Investigating Officer and his statement was recorded and thereafter, he was also arrested in connection with the said case.

(iii) Thereafter, on 01.11.2019, one Phani Narjinary filed a complaint before the learned Special Judge, Kamrup(M), Guwahati and NDPS Case No.

81/2019 was registered.

(iv) On 28.07.2020, learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 1, Kamrup(M), Guwahati framed charges against the present petitioner and two other co-

accused under Section 21(c)/29 of the NDPS Act, 1985.

4. Mr. J.I. Barbhuiya, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that though the charges under Section 21(c)/29 of the NDPS Act, 1985 have been framed against the present petitioner, however, there is nothing on record to show the total weight of contraband seized in this case. It is further submitted that though the seizure list shows that 1000 (one thousand) bottles of codeine cough syrup were seized in this case, however, what was the content of each bottle of the seized contraband has not been mentioned anywhere and hence, it is submitted that trial court was wrong in framing charges against the present petitioner under section 21(c)/29 of the NDPS Act, 1985 as there was no basis for the court to ascertain the total quantity of the seized contraband as only the total number of bottles seized has been mentioned in the seizure list without mentioning anything regarding the total weight of the content of each bottle.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that though there was considerable delay in filing the present revision petition, as the impugned order was passed on 28.07.2020, whereas, the instant revision has been filed on 10.02.2022, however, as the said period was affected by Covid-19 and as the Apex Court in Miscellaneous Application No. 21/2022 has observed that in cases where the limitation would have expired during the period between 15.03.2020 and 28.02.2022, notwithstanding the actual balance period of limitation remaining all persons shall have a limitation period of 90 days from 01.03.2022, in the event the actual balance period of limitation remaining with effect from 01.03.2022 is greater than

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