SHIV SHANKAR AGRAWAL Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has filed this revision petition under Sections 397/401 of Cr. PC against the order dated 26-7-2012 passed in Case No, 01/2011 (NDPS) by Special Judge (NDPS Act), Bhind, framing charges for the offence punishable under Section 8 (c) read with Sections 29, 27-A, 15 (c) read with Section 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short "NDPS Act". The brief facts of the case are that the officers of respondent on an information that petitioner-Shiv Shankar Agrawal is involved in illicit trade of poppy straw (Doda Chura) at Malanpur Industrial Area of District Bhind, raided the premises of one closed factory and accused Surendra Singh was found in the premises from whose possession poppy straw powder total 4202.940 kg. was seized and on information, licence was also seized from Surendra Singh. On information given by Surendra Singh, petitioner was also arrested and from his possession some documents of Balaji Traders have been seized. Challan has been filed against petitioner. Surendra Singh and other accused persons on the basis of statement recorded under Section 67 of NDPS Act and learned Trial Court vide its impugned order dated 26-7-2012 has framed the charges against the petitioner as mentioned hereinabove.

(2.) Being aggrieved by the impugned order, petitioner has filed this petition on the grounds that no poppy straw has been seized from his custody and he has been falsely implicated on the basis of statement recorded under Section 67 of NDPS Act, which is retracted statement regarding which objections have already been filed by the petitioner immediately when he was produced before the concerned Judge.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that poppy straw has been seized from the possession of accused Surendra Singh and licence has also been seized from Surendra Singh according to which he was permitted to keep 50 quintal of poppy straw supplied to persons having certificate from the doctor for consumption of poppy straw and the quantity of poppy straw seized from the possession of Surendra Singh is within the limit prescribed in the licence, therefore, no offence is made out. It is further submitted that at the most, there may be breach of conditions of licence as entries in the stock were not complete. There is no documentary evidence on record connecting the petitioner with the illicit trade of poppy straw with accused-Surendra Singh. The vehicle seized from the petitioner does not belong to him as the vehicle is registered in the name of brother of petitioner and the documents seized from the vehicle are in the name of brother of petitioner. Further, there is no documentary evidence that Surendra Singh was an employee of petitioner.