DILIP Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The following question has been referred to this Bench by a learned Single Judge of this court:-

(2.) The above question was referred by the learned single Judge of this court by virtue of an order dated 01.05.2009. The background for such a reference is that in the course of hearing of the bail application, one of the points that arose for consideration was whether the percentage content of Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) in the quantity of charas recovered from the petitioner could actually be determinative of its purity. As per the prosecution, the petitioner was found in possession of 4 1/2 kg of charas which would fall in the category of commercial quantity. The petitioner has been in custody since 24.05.2005. During the trial, Dr Madhulika Sharma, Assistant Director (Chemistry), Forensic Science Laboratory had deposed that she had found the parcel sent to her in the present case to be containing charas and that she had not determined the percentage of THC in the said samples as, in her view, it was not necessary in terms of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as "NDPS Act").

(3.) Before the learned single Judge, it was urged on behalf of the petitioner that it was not only possible, but necessary for determining the purity percentage thereof which, in turn, was necessary to classify the quantity recovered under one of the three categories, namely, small, intermediate or commercial. Reliance had been placed by the learned counsel for the petitioner on two single Bench decisions in the case of Union of India v. Stephen Andreas Hofman, 2007 7 AD(Del) 486 and Krit Mehto v. State,2008 2 JCC 94.