Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Boddeti Narendra Kumar vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 21 June, 2024
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.2938 of 2019
ORDER:
-
The present Criminal Petition is filed to call for records pertaining to FIR
No.133 of 2019 on the file of the Station House Officer, Arilova Police Station,
Visakhapatnam and to quash the same against the petitioner/accused No.7.
2. It is alleged by the respondent herein that the Arillova police has
registered the crime vide FIR No.133 of 2019 against the accused for the
offences punishable under Section 21(a) of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic
Substances Act (NDPS), 1985.
3. On perusal of the FIR, it reveals that the city task force and B.Appa Rao
S.I., Arillova Police Station along with the staff proceeded through Gayatri
Engg. College near Gitam University, where one person M.Satyanarayana
skulk away on seeing police, the police captured him and when questioned,
he confessed that he attended the rave party on 13.04.2019 organized by the
Sai Raghava Chowdhary @ Sonu and the police surrounded them, then they
kept the amount and drugs under the cover of stones at the party area and the
accused came there and collected the drugs and amounts to sell, finally
admitted his guilt before the Tahsildar, Visakhapatnam Rural, in the presence
of the mediators. Basing upon the said allegations, the police has registered
crime for the offences punishable under Sections 21(a) of NDPS Act and the
same is assailed in the present Criminal Petition on the ground that the
petitioner name was not reflected in the FIR, his name was added basing
upon the confession statement made by the accused No.2 and the petitioner
did not possesses, sell, purchase, transport, import, inter-state exports, inter-
state or uses any psychotropic substance, but there is no allegation against
the petitioner herein to bring home the guilt in the above said Sections.
Proceedings against the petitioner is nothing but an abuse of process of law.
In the above said circumstances, prayed to quash the proceedings.
4. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of Neeharika Infrastructure
Private Limited v. State of Maharastra1 taking note of several judgments
and also in the case of R.Kalyani v. Janak C.Mehta & Ors2, held out the
following pressing principles from the judgments:
(1) The High Court ordinarily would not exercise its inherent jurisdiction to
quash a criminal proceeding and, in particular, a First Information Report
unless the allegations contained therein, even if given face value and
taken to be correct in their entirety, disclosed no cognizable offence.
(2) For the said purpose, the Court, save and except in very exceptional
circumstances, would not look to any document relied upon by the
defence.
2021 SCC online SC 315
(2009) 1 SCC 516
(3) Such a power should be exercised very sparingly. If the allegations
made in the FIR disclose commission of an offence, the court shall not go
beyond the same and pass an order in favour of the accused to hold
absence of any mens rea or actus reus.
(4) If the allegation discloses a civil dispute, the same by itself may not be
a ground to hold that the criminal proceedings should not be allowed to
continue."
5. The Hon'ble Apex Court in a recent judgment in Anirudha Khanwalkar
v. Sharmila Das and others3 also held that, when a prima facie case is made
out for issuing process against the respondents to face trial for the offence
punishable, for which they were summoned, and when there is a prima facie
case is made out to proceed with the investigation and when there is an
allegation with regard to commission of cognizable offence by the accused
and when the investigation is at nascent stage, the High Court should refrain
to interfere under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code.
6. In view of the judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court, this Court on
perusal of the contents of the FIR, found that there is specific allegation which
attracts the offence of the NDPS Act, which is a cognizable offence.
7. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. However, the police are
directed to complete the investigation and file the charge sheet as
expeditiously as possible.
As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.
___________________________________
JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO
21st June, 2024
RKS
