THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C (U/S 528 BNSS) PRAYING TO a) QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN CC.NO.54072/2026 ARISING OUT OF CR.NO.35/2026 OF 1st RESPONDENT GOVINDAPURA P.S., FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 27(b) OF NDPS ACT, 1985, PENDING ON THE FILE OF XI ACJM, BENGALURU (ANNEXURE-A).

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

ORAL ORDER

1. The petitioner is before this Court calling in question the proceedings in C.C.No.54072/2026 registered for the offence punishable under Section 27(b) of the NDPS Act, 1985.

2. Heard Ms. Sofiya, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri. B.N. Jagadeesha, learned Additional Special Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the issue in the lis is answered by the judgment rendered by this Court in WP.No.31069/2024 disposed on 29.04.2025.

4. The learned Additional Special Public Prosecutor on verification of the records would not dispute the position of law, as is laid down by this Court in the aforesaid judgment.

5. This Court in WP.No.31069/2024 has held as follows:

"18. In the case at hand, the test is conducted at Santosh Hospital. The Additional State Public Prosecutor has not produced any material to demonstrate as to why the urine samples were or are always sent to Santosh Hospital, a private laboratory and not to any Government laboratory. Prior to sending the sample for testing what is necessary is, authorisation of the Magistrate. No material is produced that the Magistrate had authorised the testing at a private laboratory. The State has also failed to produce any Government notification or Circular which recognizes Santosh Hospital as a Government recognized/authorised laboratory for any kind of testing. Therefore, the very report that is provided by the 2nd respondent is seeped in suspicion, as one urine sample cannot project 5 broad band drugs or 5 psychotropic substances. 5 narcotic drugs in one urine sample cannot emerge, let alone psychotropic substances.

19. It is in public domain that narcotic drugs are derivatives of natural products. Psychotropic substances are chemical derivatives. The indication in the urine sample is 5 chemical substances and if a person would consume all five, his life would be at risk. It is, therefore, necessary after the conduct of test of urine samples, confirmatory tests become mandatory. The confirmatory tests are as afore-quoted. It is not that there is no consideration by any Court with regard to confirmatory tests. The Kerala High Court, in extensor, has considered the tests in the case of SUO MOTU v. STATE OF KERALA in 2021 SCC OnLine Ker. 665, and held as follows:

“…. …. ….6. State Police Chief/Director General of Police, Police Headquarters, Thiruvananthapuram, 3rd respondent, has filed another statement dated 21.11.2019, wherein he has produced a chart showing the number of NDPS Crimes registered during the period 01.01.2016 to 30.09.2019 in each Police Districts in Kerala - gender wise. Said statement is reproduced.

“A. A statement has been filed in this regard on behalf of the State Police Chief on 30.09.2019 narrating the steps taken to obtain the performance analyses of Abon Drug Detection Kit. This Court, after considering the case on 24.10.2019 issued an interim order directing that Director General of Police and State Police Chief, Kerala to furnish a detailed statement of men, women and children involved in such crimes and also the performance analysis report of ‘Abon Kits’ in the detection of NDPS crimes. In this regard a performance analysis report was obtained from the concerned authorities and the contents of the report are narrated hereunder.

B. The District Police Chief Kochi, City collected ten numbers of ABON Kit from Chief Store, Trivandrum and distributed to Assistant Commissioner of Police, Narcotic Cell, K