THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA

ORDER:

This criminal petition is filed seeking to quash the proceedings against the petitioner-accused No.7 in CC No.1192 of 2024 on the file of VII Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at Hayathnagar, Ranga Reddy District, for the offences under Sections 8(c) read with 20(b)(ii)(A) and 27 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short ‘NDPS Act’).

2. Heard Mr.D.L. Pandu, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms.Shalini Saxena, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the respondent No.1-State.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is a student and that he is alleged to be a consumer and there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioner. He further submitted that there is no seizure from the possession of the tests to detect the trace of drug. Thus, there is absolutely no evidence to implicate the petitioner, as such, continuance of proceedings against him would be unjust. He further submitted that a co-ordinate bench of this Court has quashed the proceedings in Crl.P. No.8083 and 8748 of 2025 against petitioners therein. Hence, the petitioner is entitled to the same relief that was granted in favour of accused Nos. 7 and 11. Hence, he prayed to quash the proceedings against the petitioner.

4. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor has submitted that on the information received, the police have searched the premises and the petitioner was found along with the other accused consuming ganja and that ganja was seized during the course of investigation.

5. Perused the record.

6. The record reveals that accused Nos.2 to 7 are alleged to be the consumers of ganja and 40 grams of ganja was seized pursuant to their confession. The recitals of charge sheet revealed that on enquiry, the accused Nos.2 to 7 have confessed and in pursuance of confession, 40 grams of ganja was seized from the room. There is no specific averment with regard to seizure from the was conducted to detect the consumption of drug by the petitioner herein.

7. In the similar circumstances, a coordinate Bench of this Court has quashed the proceedings in Crl.P. No.8083 and 8748 of

2025 against petitioners therein, who were also alleged to be consumers and in view of the same, the petitioner herein is also entitled for the same relief. Hence, the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Tofan Singh v. The State of Tamilnadu, 2021 (4) SCC 1 wherein it was held that a confessional statement recorded under Section 67 of the NDPS Act is inadmissible in evidence, is applicable to the case on hand. There is no other evidence but for the confessional statement of the petitioner in this case. That being the position, in the absence of any material evidence, continuance of proceedings against the petitioner would be unjustified and abuse of process of Law.

8. For the aforesaid reasons, the Criminal Petition is allowed and the proceedings against the petitioner in CC No.1192 of 2024 on the file of VII Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at Hayathnagar, Ranga Reddy District, are hereby quashed.

Miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

____________________________ JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA October 16, 2025 KTL