Angirekula Rohith vs The State Of Telangana
2024 Latest Caselaw 1445 Tel

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 1445 Tel
Judgement Date : 8 April, 2024

Telangana High Court

Angirekula Rohith vs The State Of Telangana on 8 April, 2024

      THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA
         CRIMINAL PETITION No.1502 OF 2024
ORDER:

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of the

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C.') to quash

the proceedings against the petitioner/accused No.20 in

SC.NDPS.No.275 of 2022, on the file of the learned Metropolitan

Sessions Judge, Nampally, Hyderabad, registered for the

offences punishable under Section 27 Narcotic Drugs and

Psychotropic Substances Amendment Act, 2014 and Sections

8C, 20(b)(ii)(B), 22(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic

Substances Act, 1985 (for short 'the NDPS Act').

2. Brief facts of the case are that the respondent registered a

case against the petitioner and other accused stating that, on

receipt of credible information that some persons are in

possession of Narcotic Substances, he informed the same to his

superior officer and obtained permission to verify the veracity

and thereafter, he addressed a letter to CEO, Cantonment Board

with a request to depute two government officials to act as

mediators. Thereafter, he explained about the information he

received to the said mediators. He along with the said

mediators and staff went to the premises and found that the

SKS,J Crl.P.No.1502 OF 2024

petitioner and other accused are in possession of Ganja, Hash

Oil Bottles and MDMA respectively. Basing on the complaint

given by him, the Police registered a case against the petitioner

and other accused in Crime No.41 of 2022 for the offences

under Section 27 NDPS Amendment Act, 2014 and Sections 8C,

20(b)(ii)(B), 22(b) of the NDPS Act and after completion of

investigation, they filed charge sheet and the same was

numbered as SC.NDPS.No.275 of 2022 before the Metropolitan

Sessions Judge, Nampally, Hyderabad.

3. Heard Sri Rajagopallavan Tayi, learned counsel appearing

on behalf of the petitioner as well as Sri S. Ganesh, learned

Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the

respondent.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the

petitioner was included in the crime stating that he has

consumed Ganja and he is in touch with the prime accused.

Except the confessional statement, there is no other allegation

against the petitioner. As such, prayed the Court to quash the

proceedings against the petitioner.

5. In support of his submission, learned counsel for the

petitioner relied on the judgment of this Court in Criminal

SKS,J Crl.P.No.1502 OF 2024

Petition No.5502 of 2023, wherein in paragraph No.9 it is held

as follows:

"09. Remand report itself reveals that upon instructions of accused No.1, accused Nos.2 and 3 came down to Hyderabad with narcotic drug cocaine and to sell the same in small quantity to the needy people. The petitioner/accused No.15 was neither arrested at the site nor was any contraband material seized from him. Moreover, all the witnesses including panch witnesses in this case were official witnesses."

6. On the other hand, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor

submitted that the petitioner has addicted to consume Ganja

and he has to file Medical Certificate before the trial Court, as

such, prayed the Court to dismiss the petition.

7. Having regard to the rival submissions made by both the

learned counsel and having gone through the material available

on record, to quash the proceedings under Section 482 of

Cr.P.C, the Court has to see whether the averments in the

complaint prima facie shows that it constitute the offence as

alleged by the Police.

8. At this stage, it is pertinent to note the Judgment of the

Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh vs.

Surendra Kori 1, wherein in paragraph No.14 it is held as

follows:

(2012) 10 Supreme Court Cases 155

SKS,J Crl.P.No.1502 OF 2024

"The High Court in exercise of its powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. does not function as a Court of appeal or revision. This Court has, in several judgments, held that the inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C., though wide, has to be used sparingly, carefully and with caution. The High Court, under Section 482 Cr.P.C., should normally refrain from giving a prima facie decision in a case where the entire facts are incomplete and hazy, more so when the evidence has not been collected and produced before the Court and the issues involved, whether factual or legal, are of wide magnitude and cannot be seen in their true perspective without sufficient material."

9. As seen from the record, it is to be noted that the

petitioner was not in possession of Ganja. The prime contention

of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner has

consumed Ganja is the allegation against him. Except the

confessional statement there are no other allegations against

him. Earlier, this Court has quashed the proceedings in

Criminal Petition No.5502 of 2023 wherein it is stated that no

confessional statement was recorded under Section 27 of the

NDPS Act and it would remain inadmissible in the trial and

quashed the proceedings stating that no charge sheet is filed till

date and there is a limitation for taking cognizance, whereas in

SKS,J Crl.P.No.1502 OF 2024