RUPESH SINGLA Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Tersely, the facts & material, culminating in the commencement, relevant for the limited purpose of deciding the core controversy, involved in the instant petition and oozing out from the record, are that on 7.1.2006, a police party headed by ASI Tarlochan Singh was present at Bus-stand, Chakerian Road, Raipur, in connection with patrolling and checking of suspected persons. Meanwhile, he received a secret information to the effect that petitioners Rupesh Singla and Rohit Singla sons of Roop Chand Singla, have loaded a large number of intoxicating drugs, in their white coloured Maruti car, bearing registration No.CH01X- 9259 and were going to village Makha, Raipur, to sell the same. Believing the information to be true, the police has sent the writing (ruqqa) to the police station, arranged a Barrier (Nakabandi) and DSP Sardulgarh was also informed accordingly. In pursuance of the secret information, the car of petitioners was stopped. Having completed all the codal/statutory formalities, it was searched and 43500 tablets of Momolit; 400 Capsules -Spasmo Parmin; 144 Capsules-Spasmo Proxyvon; 5000 Tablets of Diazepam; 400 Tablets of Ampax; 450 Tablets of Altrax; 4150 Tablets of Carisoma; 720 Capsules of Hypvin; 59 bottles of syrup Rexcof and 1000 Tablets of Kuedya, containing commercial quantity of salt/narcotic substances were recovered from the possession of petitioners without any permit or licence.

(2.) Thereafter, the pointed drugs were taken into possession by the police, vide recovery memos. In the background of these allegations and in the wake of recovery of commercial quantity of indicated drugs and narcotic substances, the present case was registered against the petitioners-accused, by way of FIR No.3 dated 7.1.2006 (Annexure P3), on accusation of having committed the offences punishable u/ss 21 & 22 of, The Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter to be referred as "the NDPS Act") by the police of Police Station Jaurkian, District Mansa.

(3.) Instead of submitting to the jurisdiction of Special/trial Court, the petitioners have preferred the instant petition, to quash the impugned FIR and all other subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, invoking the provisions of section 482 Cr.PC, inter-alia, pleading that they were jointly running the business of wholesale druggists and chemists under the name and style of Roop Medical Store, Mansa. The drugs license (Annexure P1) was issued in the name of their father Roop Chand Singla. He has purchased the recovered drugs from different firms, by means of invoice/cash memos (Annexures P5 to P11). The petitioners claimed that if the prosecution case is taken to be true and accepted as such in its entirety, even then, no offences in question are made out against them. Since they have been falsely implicated in this case by the police, so, the impugned FIR is liable to be quashed. On the strength of aforesaid grounds, the petitioners sought to quash the impugned FIR (Annexure P3) and all consequent proceedings arising thereto in the manner depicted here-in-above.