AJAYA MOHAPATRA Vs. STATE OF ODISHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners have invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court u/s 482 Cr.P.C seeking quashing of the criminal prosecution initiated against them in Baselisahi P.S. Case No.38 of 2023 for the offences under Ss. -21(c)/29 of the N.D.P.S. Act and also praying for setting aside the order dtd. 31/7/2023 passed by the learned Special Judge, Puri taking cognizance of the offences as stated above.

(2.) The petitioners have assailed the entire criminal prosecution and the cognizance order dtd. 31/7/2023 passed by the learned Special Judge, Puri in T.R. Case No.83 of 2023 on the ground that the learned Special Judge, Puri, while taking cognizance on 31/7/2023 and subsequently while framing the charges on 19/10/2023 has ignored the fact that in the preliminary charge sheet, the chemical examination report was not filed by the prosecution, Therefore, the said charge sheet was incomplete under the mandate of the provisions of Sec. 173 Cr.P.C.

(3.) Mr. Devashis Panda, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that as per the settled principle of law, which holds the field as of today, a charge sheet filed without the chemical examination report is an incomplete charge sheet. Relying upon the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Mohd. Arbaz and others vrs. State of NCT of Delhi, Sunil Vasantrao Phulbande and another vs. State of Maharastra and Central Bureau of Investigation vs. R.S. Pai and another as well as the judgment of this Court in the case of Sk. Eimat @ Bidhia vs. State of Odisha he submits that the cognizance order and the subsequent order of framing of charge against his clients will not stand the scrutiny of law. As such, it is liable to be set aside.