THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENIVAS RAO + CRIMINAL PETITION No.16245 OF 2025 % Dated 09.12.2025 # Rajan Likhil Sai, S/o. Sri Rajan Gopi, Age about 21 years, Occ: Students, R/o.H.No.4-5-2D, Vasavi Colony, Jangon District, Telangana.

….Petitioner VERSUS $ The State of Telangana Rep. through Public Prosecutor, High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad For the State of Telangana and another … Respondents ! Counsel for Petitioner : Sri E.Venkata Siddhartha ^ Counsel for Respondents : Sri Veeramalla Jithendar Rao < GIST:

> HEAD NOTE:

? CITATIONS:

1. 2021 SCC OnLine TS 2195

2. Criminal Revision Case No. 1278 of 2015, order dated 27.01.2016 (Madras High court)

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J.SREENIVAS RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No.16245 of 2025 Date: 09.12.2025 Between:

Rajan Likhil Sai ...Petitioner AND The State of Telangana Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad For the State of Telangana and another ...Respondents

ORDER

This Criminal Petition has been filed seeking to quash the proceedings in Crime No.840 of 2025 on the file of Dundigal Police Station, Cyberabad Commissionerate, wherein the petitioner has been arrayed as accused No.2 for the offence punishable under Section 27 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short ‘NDPS Act’).

2. Heard Sri E.Venkata Siddhartha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.V.Jithendar Rao, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondents.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has not committed any offence and he has been falsely implicated in the present crime. Even according to the allegations made in the complaint, no contraband was seized from the possession of the petitioner. However, based on the medical test, the petitioner was implicated as an accused on the ground that the investigation revealed that the petitioner had consumed the contraband, namely Ganja. He further submits that, on the request made by the petitioner, he was referred to the Government Hospital for Mental Care, Hyderabad, wherein the petitioner underwent treatment and attended counselling sessions from 09.09.2025 to 17.09.2025. Thereafter, the concerned authorities conducted a medical test, and in the said test, the result was found to be negative. The Superintendent of the said hospital issued a medical certificate to that effect on 19.09.2025.

4. Learned counsel further submits that, as per the provisions of Section 64-A of the NDPS Act, the continuation of the proceedings for the offence under Section 27 of the Act against the petitioner is a clear abuse of process of law and the same is liable to be quashed.

5. In support of his contention, learned counsel relied upon the principle laid down by this Court in Anish Kumar Dundoo v. State of Telangana.

6. Per contra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the Investigating Officer has already issued notice under Section 35(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, ‘BNSS’). Hence, the petitioner is entitled to submit his reply to the said notice, and he is not entitled to seek quashing of the proceedings at this stage. Whether the petitioner has committed the offence or not has to be revealed during the course of investigation, and therefore, the petitioner cannot seek quashing of the proceedings.

7. Having considered the rival submissions made by the respective parties and after perusal of the material available on record, it reveals that no contraband was seized from the possession of the petitioner. However, the petitioner was made accused No.2 in the present case on the ground that he had consumed Ganja, based on the test conducted by the concerned authorities. Subsequently, on the request made by the petitioner, he was referred for de-addiction treatment. The record further reveals

1 2021 SCC OnLine TS 2195

that the petitioner underwent medical treatment from 09.09.2025 to 17.09.2025 and also attended counsel