The reliance on a hospital certificate without forensic evidence is insufficient for prosecution under narcotics law, constituting an abuse of process.

ORAL ORDER

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T)

Heard Shri B.C.Jnanayyaswamy learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri Jairam Siddi, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent – State.

2. This petition is filed by the petitioner – accused No.1 under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with a prayer to quash the entire proceedings in C.C.No.38/2025 pending on the file of the II Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Dharwad arising out of Crime No.85/2024 of Town Police Station, Dharwad registered for the offence punishable under Section 27(b) of the Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances, Act, 1985 (“NDPS Act” for short) by the Town Police Station, Dharwad.

3. Brief facts of the case of the prosecution are as under:

On 04.08.2024, as per the order of the Police Commissioner, Hubballi-Dharwad Commissionarate, Hubballi, the Police Inspector, Town Police Station Dharwad, who was on duty received information as to consummation of some Narcotic Drugs and who were behaving abnormal. Therefore, the Police Inspector and his sub-staff were proceeding on patrolling duty on public road, Madaramaddi, Dharwad about 15 students were smoking cigarette and who were behaving abnormal. Hence, the first informant and his sub-staff apprehended the said persons and produced them before the Dharwad Institute Of Mental Health And Neurosciences (“DIMHANS” for short), Hospital, Dharwad for medical examination. The doctor in the said hospital after examining the accused persons had given certificate that the urine of the 7 persons had tested Marijuana positive and urine of 8 persons had tested negative. Therefore FIR was registered in Crime No.85/2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 27(B) of NDPS Act.

4. Being aggrieved by the registration of FIR in Crime No.85/2024, the petitioner – accused No.1, is before this Court.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner is aged about 28 years and working in private company, he has falsely implicated in the crime. Except, the certificate issued by the doctor of DIMHANS, Hospital, Dharwad, there is no material produced against him. Accordingly, he prays to allow the petition.

6. Learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent – State contended that, the sample of urine of the petitioner or any other persons, who were secured by the Police were not forwarded to the Forensic Science Laboratory for the purpose of examination. It shows that the prosecution has placed reliance on the certificate issued by the DIMHANS Hospital, Dharwad, in support of the allegation against the petitioner contending that, he had consumed Narcotic Drugs. In fact, the doctors in the DIMHANS Hospital is not a competent authority to issue such certificate in proof of the allegations and in the absence of the chemical examination from the Forensic Science Laboratory, there cannot be any certificate that the urine of the accused tested Marijuana positive.

7. Hence, it is just and necessary analyze Section 27-B and 8A of NDPS Act, which read as under:

27B. Punishment for contravention of Section 8A .- Whoever contravenes the provision of Section 8A shall be punishale with rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than three years but which may extend to then years and shall also be liable to fine.

8A. Prohibition of certain activities relating to property derived from offence.—

(i) convert or transfer any property knowing that such property is derived from an offence committed under this Act or under any other corresponding law of any other country or from an act of participation in such offence, for the purpose of concealing or disguising the illicit origin of the property or to assist any person in the commission of an