Telangana High Court
M.Srinivas Goud vs The State Of Telangana on 22 July, 2025
THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA
CRIMINAL PETITION No.3924 OF 2025
ORDER:
This criminal petition is filed by the petitioner seeking the
Court to quash the proceedings against him in FIR No.231 of 2024
of GummadidalaPolice Station. The offences alleged against the
petitioner are under Section 8 (c) r/w.22 (C) and 29 of Narcotic
Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, (for short 'NDPS'
Act).
2. The facts of the case are that on 31.12.2024 at 12.30 hours,
the complainant-S.I. of Police, Gummadidala Police Station lodged
a report stating that on credible information about illegal
transportation of Alprazolam at Toll gate at Gummadidala Village,
immediately he went to the said place and conducted vehicle check
at Toll gate, meanwhile, they noticed one unregistered Hero Honda
Glamour Bike coming from Narsapur and when the said person
saw the police and tried to flee away, the police chased him and
caught hold of him. On enquiry he revealed his name as Dollari
Sailu-A.4 and on questioning about illegal transportation of
Alprazolaminitially he gave un-related answers. The drug
inspector identified the raw materials present in the bike tank
cover and stated that it is Alprazolam and thereafter the said
person accepted that it is Alprazolam. They recorded the
confession statement of accused No.1. Basing on the said
confession the police registered the case against the petitioner for
the above said offences.
3. Heard Sri Chandrasekhar Yadav, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Sri M.Vivekananda Reddy, learned Assistant Public
Prosecutor appearing for respondent-State.
4. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that
petitioner is arrayed as A.12 and he is no way connected with the
said offence. Basing on the confession statement this petitioner is
shown as A.12 and the statement recorded under 67 of NDPS Act
is inadmissible in the trial for an offence under NDPS Act in view of
Tofan Singh Vs State of Tamilnadu 1. The petitioner was arrayed
as accused basing on the confession statement which have no
evidentiary value and the confession has to lead to recovery or
otherwise from the possession of petitioner. Even though the
police have not made out a case independent of the confessional
statements, the police are trying to arrest the petitioner. As the
implication of petitioner is basing on the confession statement of
1 (2013) 16 SCC 31
A.8, is baseless and requests this Court to quash the proceedings
against the petitioner.
5. On the other hand the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor
would submit that the allegations against the petitioner are severe
in nature and the case is only at FIR stage. At this stage, it cannot
be said that there is no evidence against the petitioner and the
investigation is still pending and the judgments relied on by the
petitioner would be applicable only after filing charge sheet. As
such, it is pre-mature at this stage and requests this Court to
dismiss this petition.
6. Considering the submissions made by both the Counsel and
the material on record the offences alleged against the petitioner
are under Section 8 (c) r/w.22 (C) and 29 of NDPS Act which is
severe in nature. According to the prosecution this petitioner is
also involved in illegal transportation of Alprazolam. There are
severe allegations against this petitioner and the quantity involved
in this case is huge quantity of Alprazolam and it is at the stage of
FIR only. The judgments relied on by the petitioner are applicable
only after investigation is completed and filing of charge sheet.
Therefore, at this stage it cannot be said that except the confession
statement there is no other evidence against the petitioner. Hence,
the petitioner is not entitled for quashing of proceedings and the
same is liable to be dismissed.
7. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed.
Miscellaneous petitions, pending, if any, shall stand closed.
______________
K. SUJANA, J
Date: 22.07.2025
Rds
