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

2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 26769

KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
MR S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR, J
MR. DHANARAM PATEL S/O NARAYAN RAM – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KARNATAKA BY EXCISE INSPECTOR, NORTH RANGE, TUMKURU – Respondent
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 10262 OF 2024 | 482(Cr.PC) | 528(BNSS)



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners:SRI. HASHMATH PASHA, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR SRI. KARIAPPA N.A.
For the Respondents: SMT. RASHMI JADHAV, ADDL.SPP

Inconclusive chemical reports lacking THC percentage render charges under the NDPS Act void, necessitating case dismissal and quashing of proceedings.

Headnote:(A) Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Sections 20(b)(ii)(c), 25, 8

(C) - Quashing of FIR - Petitioner seeks to quash FIR based on inconclusive chemical report indicating presence of cannabis - Court highlights that the report failed to determine THC percentage necessary for classifying the substance as Ganja or Charas - Investigating Officer's reliance on an erroneous report led to the filing of the charge sheet despite lack of supporting evidence - Court emphasizes the necessity of clear and definitive proof regarding the substance's classification. (Paras 8, 10, 21)

(B) The trial court committed an error in failing to adequately assess the inconclusive nature of the evidence before it, resulting in the rejection of the petitioner’s discharge application on unfounded grounds. (Paras 11, 12)

(C) Court underscores that mere presence of tetrahydrocannabinol is insufficient without quantitative measures to classify the cannabis products correctly. (Paras 24, 30)

Facts of the case:
Petitioner, arrested by the Excise Department, faced charges under the NDPS Act based on the seizure of products suspected to contain cannabis - Chemical analysis returned inconclusive results on THC content, casting doubt on the classification as contraband.

Findings of Court:
The investigations were flawed due to reliance on indefinite laboratory reports that did not adhere to legal requirements, ultimately leading to the unjust charge sheet and subsequent proceedings.

Issues: The primary issue concerns the validity of the chemical report and whether it constituted sufficient evidence for prosecution under NDPS.

Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that the lack of definitive evidence regarding THC levels voided the legitimacy of the charges under the NDPS Act, thus justifying the quashing of the proceedings initiated against the petitioner.

Result: Petition partly allowed; FIR and related proceedings quashed.

Table of Content
1. petitioner’s fir quashing request. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5)
2. petitioner argues legal violations. (Para 6 , 7 , 8)
3. ambiguities in laboratory report. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13)
4. lack of sufficient evidence for conviction. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 21)
5. court quashes impugned proceedings. (Para 22 , 23)

ORAL ORDER

In this petition, the petitioner seeks the following reliefs:

(1) To quash the FIR registered in FIR No.9/2022-23/3002DYSE/300215 for offence U/S 20(b)(ii)(c), 25, 8(C) at Annexure-B as illegal and abuse of process of law.

(2) To Quash the Charge Sheet filed by Respondent No.1 which is registered as Spl.C.No.249/2023 on the file of Hon’ble Principal District and Sessions Judge, Tumakuru in FIR No. 9/2022-23/3002DYSE/300215 on the file of Respondent No.1 for offence U/S 20(b)(ii)(c), 25, 8(C) as per Annexure-C as abuse of process of law.

(3) To set aside the order of cognizance dated 07.02.2023 and issue of process dated 09.02.2023 passed in Spl.C.No.249/2023 for offence U/S 20(b)(ii)(c), 25, 8(C) on the file of Hon’ble Principal District and Sessions Judge, Tumkur as per Annexure-D as illegal and abuse of process of law.

(4) To set aside the Order dated 26.03.2024 in rejecting discharge application passed in Spl.C.No.249/2023 on the file of Hon’ble Principal District and Sessions Judge, Tumkur as per Annexure-K as illegal and abuse of process of law.

(5) Consequently, to quash the entire proceedings pending in Spl.C.No.249/2023 on the file of Hon’ble Principal District and Sessions Judge, Tumkur which is arising out of FIR No. 9/2022- 23/3002DYSE/300215 for offence U/S 20(b)(ii)(c), 25, 8(C) on the file of Respondent’s as per Annexure-B (FIR), Annexure-C (Charge sheet), Annexure-D order of taking cognizance and issue of process and Annexure-K order rejecting discharge application, as an abuse of process of law.

(6) To grant reasonable compensation for the illegal arrest of petitioner on 05.08.2022 and got remanded him to Judicial Custody on 06.08.2022 and illegally detained in Prison till 17.08.2022 in FIR No.9/2022-23/3002DYSE/300215 on the file of Respondent No.2 which resulted violation of his fundamental right guaranteed under article 21 of the constitution, and

(7) To grant such other relief or reliefs as this Hon’ble Court deems fit to grant, in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice.”

2. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that on 05.08.2022, the 2nd respondent – Dy.S.P. conducted a raid of the petitioner’s shop M/s.Rakesh Zarda Agency and seized 7 plastic bags containing chocolates by name “Atul Munnakka” to an extent of 51.470 Kgs and arrested the petitioner, who was subsequently released on bail vide order dated 17.08.2022 passed in Crl.Misc.No.1187/2022. On 18.08.2022, the Investigating Officer / Excise Inspector did an Inventory and drew samples of the seized items and forwarded the same for chemical analysis to the Central Chemical Laboratory (for short ‘CC Laboratory’), Department of Excise, Bangalore, on 24.08.2022. The said Laboratory submitted a report dated 20.09.2022 interalia stating that as per the two types of colour test conducted by it, the samples had tested ‘positive’ for having contained cannabis and rendered an opinion that the samples are confirmed as ‘genus of cannabis (ganja)’.

3. Subsequently, on 04.02.2023, the Investigating Officer submitted a requisition to the aforesaid Laboratory seeking a proper report as to the quantity, percentage etc., of THC (Tetra Hydro Cannabinol) contained in the samples and their effect on the human body so as to ascertain whether the samples contained ganja or not for the purpose of filing the charge sheet. The said CC Laboratory submitted a reply dated 04.02.2023 interalia stating that the percentage of THC in the samples cannot be ascertained, since necessary equipment in this regard was not available to arrive at a conclusion as to whether ganja was found in the mixed chocolates.

4. Thereafte

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