Telangana High Court
Mohammed Ateeq vs The State Of Telangana on 9 January, 2025
Author: Juvvadi Sridevi
Bench: Juvvadi Sridevi
THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE JUVVADI SRIDEVI
CRIMINAL PETITION No.16327 of 2024
ORDER:
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 528 of
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhitha, 2023 (for short 'BNSS'),
by the petitioner/accused No.12 to quash the proceedings against
him in Crime No.1008 of 2024 of Film Nagar Police Station,
Hyderabad, registered for the offences punishable under Sections
8(c) r/w. 22(c), 27 and 29 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic
Substances Act, 1985 (for short 'Act, 1985').
2. Heard Mr. M.A.Mujeeb, learned counsel for the petitioner
and Mr. Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor appearing for the State and perused the record.
3. Basing on the complaint, dated 27.12.2024, that accused
are assembling near Graveyard, beside Kotta Cheruvu,
Ambedkarnagar, Film Nagar, Hyderabad, to exchange and sell
MDMA, the Police, Film Nagar, rushed to the scene,
apprehended them and seized 17.38 grams of MDMA, a case in
JS, J
Crime No.1008 of 2024 was registered against the petitioner and
others.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though the
petitioner is not present at the scene of offence and nothing was
recovered from his possession, merely basing on the confession
of co-accused, the petitioner was falsely implicated in the case.
In support of his contention, learned counsel relied on the
judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Tofan Singh v. State
of Tamil Nadu1, wherein, it was held that the confessional
statements recorded under Section 67 of the Act, 1985, will
remain inadmissible in the trial of an offence under the Act, 1985.
5. On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor
opposed the petition stating that specific allegations are levelled
against the petitioner and the truth or otherwise of the allegations
levelled against the petitioner can only be known after conducting
full-fledged trial before the trial Court, and hence, prayed to
dismiss the petition.
(2021) 4 SCC 1
JS, J
6. Having heard both sides and perused the material on record,
it appears that the petitioner/accused No.12 is a consumer, he was
not present at the scene of offence and nothing was seized from
his possession. As seen from the contents of the FIR, during the
course of investigation, the Police have not conducted any
medical test on the petitioner to show that he is in habitual
consumption of any narcotic substance. Furthermore, the
petitioner was arrayed as an accused in the crime basing on the
confession statement of co-accused, which is inadmissible in the
trial of an offence under the Act, 1985, as per the judgment of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in Tofan Singh's case (supra). In the
said circumstances, the continuation of proceedings against the
petitioner amounts to abuse of process of law and the same are
liable to be quashed.
7. This Criminal Petition is accordingly allowed and the
proceedings against the petitioner/accused No.12 in Crime
No.1008 of 2024 of Film Nagar Police Station, are hereby
quashed.
JS, J
Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any shall stand closed.
_____________________
JUVVADI SRIDEVI, J
Date: 09.01.2025
khrm
