Reshma vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 3481 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

Reshma vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others on 30 November, 2023

Author: Ravindra Maithani

Bench: Ravindra Maithani

      HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT
                NAINITAL
            Criminal Writ Petition No.1602 of 2023
Reshma                                                   ....Petitioner
                                 Versus

State of Uttarakhand and Others                       ....Respondents

Present:-
             Mr. Dheeraj Joshi, Advocate for the petitioner.
             Mr. Vipul Painuly, Brief Holder for the State.


                              JUDGMENT

Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)

The petitioner seeks quashing of Case Crime

No.250 of 2023, under Sections 8/21/29/60 of the Narcotic

Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Police Station

Pulbhatta, District Udham Singh Nagar, with related reliefs.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and

perused the record.

3. According to the FIR, on 10.11.2023, suspecting

the movements of co-accused Faeem Khan, he was

apprehended, and from his possession, 608 grams smack was

recovered. He then revealed that he had brought the smack

from the petitioner

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit

that the petitioner has been made accused merely based on

the statement of the co-accused Faeem Khan. He would also

submit that on 22.09.2023, smack was recovered from some

other persons. They also named the petitioner as the person

from whom they had brought smack,

5. It is a writ petition under Article 226 of the

Constitution of India. In case, the FIR discloses commission of

offence, generally, no interference is warranted unless there

are compelling circumstances to do so.

6. It is true that recovery has not been made from

the petitioner. It is also equally true that on 10.11.2023, 608

grams smack was allegedly recovered from the co-accused,

who named the petitioner as the person from whom he had

brought the smack.

7. The police would investigate this further. It is

the case of the petitioner herself that earlier also, on

22.09.2023, smack was recovered from some other persons,

who also named the petitioner as the person from whom they

had brought the smack. At this moment, this Court is not

concerned as to what had happened in other cases, but fact

remains, in the instant case, smack in large quantity was

recovered from the co-accused, who named the petitioner as

the person from whom he brought the smack. The role of the

petitioner would find scrutiny during investigation or trial, as

the case may be. The call detail records, any financial

transaction, online or otherwise or any other link, definitely

the police will investigate it. At this stage, there is no reason

to interfere in this investigation. Therefore, this Court is of the

view that there is no reason to make any interference, at this

stage. The petition deserves to be dismissed, at the stage of

admission itself.

8. The petition is dismissed in limine.

(Ravindra Maithani, J.) 30.11.2023 Ravi Bisht