Rakesh Srikant Khanivadekar ... vs Union Of India And Anr
2021 Latest Caselaw 17769 Bom

Rane                         1/5                  WP-2097-2021

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

              CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

              WRIT PETITION NO. 2097 OF 2021


RAKESH SHRIKANT KHANIVADEKAR
ALIAS ROCKY ALIAS RAJU     } PETITIONER

       V/S.

DIRECTORATE OF REVENUE
INTELLIGENCE                           } RESPONDENT


                     ****
Ms. Ruju R. Thakker, Advocate for respondent no.1-DRI.


                  Coram : Sandeep K. Shinde, J.

Tuesday, 21st December, 2021.

P.C. :

1. Mentioned. Not on board.

2. A praceipe has been moved for speaking to minutes of

the order dated 15th December, 2021.

3. The error pointed out is in the appearance of the

order. It is pointed out that the Advocate's name appearing

for respondent no.1, refected in the order, has been

incorrectly shown. The correct name is "Ms. Ruju R.

Rane 2/5 WP-2097-2021

Thakker". The necessary change be carried out and the

order be read accordingly.

(Sandeep K. Shinde, J.) Rane 3/5 WP-2097-2021

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION NO.2097 OF 2021

Rakesh Srikant Khanivadekar Alias Rocky Alias Raju ...Petitioner Vs Union of India & Anr. ... Respondents

...

Mr. Vimal C. Jha for the Petitioner. Ms. Ruju R. Thakker for DRI-R.No.1. Mr. Y.M.Nakhawa, APP for the Respondent No.2-State.

CORAM : SANDEEP K. SHINDE J.

DATE : DECEMBER 15, 2021.

P.C. :

The Additional Sessions Judge, Thane vide

order dated 7th October, 2020 directed Intelligence

Officer, to take appropriate steps for sending the

samples for "Re-testing".

2 This order is assailed in the Writ Petition

under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

3          Samples in question were sent for chemical
 Rane                              4/5          WP-2097-2021

analysis to the Deputy Chief Chemist, New Customs

House, Mumbai on 30th April, 2020. Report was

received on 13th May, 2020. Eleven samples were sent

for analysis; out of which one set of five samples and

another set of six samples, were sent for analysis

before two different analysts in the same laboratory.

Six samples were tested 'Positive' and balance five

were found inconclusive in nature. It appears, as per

the advice of Chemical Analyser, balance five samples

were required to be tested further. As such, prosecution

moved an application seeking permission to forward

five samples for, 're-testing'.

4 The learned Additional Sessions Judge upon

perusing the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of

Thana Singh v. Central Bureau of Narcotics in Criminal

Appeal No.1640 of 2010 dated 23 rd January, 2013,

granted the application, in view of the fact, that

application for re-testing was moved within stipulated

period of 15 days from the date of receipt of first Rane 5/5 WP-2097-2021

Report. I do not see, the learned Sessions Judge has

committed any error in the exercise of the jurisdiction.

5 In view of the facts of the case and for the

reasons stated above, petition is dismissed.

(SANDEEP K. SHINDE,J.)

Digitally signed by NEETA NEETA SHAILESH Note : Corrections are carried out in the cause-title only pursuant to speaking to SHAILESH SAWANT SAWANT Date: minutes order dated 21.12.2021.

2021.12.22 11:36:24 +0530