RAKESH KUMAR GUPTA Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER , by way of instant petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure ('Cr.P.C.' for short) seeks quashing of FIR No.82 dated 18.7.2012 under Sections 18/61/85 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 ('NDPS Act' for short) registered at Police Station Model Town, Ludhiana City and consequential proceedings arising therefrom, including the police report under Section 173 Cr.P.C., as well as the order of framing of charge and the charge sheet against the petitioner.

(2.) NOTICE of motion was issued and pursuant thereto, reply by way of affidavit dated 10.9.2014 was filed on behalf of the State.

(3.) LEARNED Senior counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was falsely implicated in the present case. Placing reliance on the report of chemical examiner at Annexure P -5, learned Senior counsel for the petitioner submits that since the percentage of Morphine was found less than 0.2% from the sample taken out of the alleged recovered contraband from the petitioner, the same cannot be termed as opium as contemplated under the provisions of NDPS Act. To substantiate his contention, learned Senior counsel for the petitioner places reliance on a Division Bench judgement of the Delhi High Court in Ravinder Kumar Vs. State (NCT of Delhi), 2010 4 RCR(Cri) 664and a judgement of this court in Tejinder Singh @ Montu Vs. State of Punjab, 2012 1 RCR(Cri) 678. Referring to different definitions under Section 2 of the NDPS Act, learned Senior counsel for the petitioner concluded by submitting that there was no scope of claiming that the contraband allegedly recovered from the petitioner was opium. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner also submits that in view of the report of chemical examiner at Annexure P -5, no charge could have been framed against the petitioner and the learned Special Judge has committed patent illegality, while passing the impugned orders Annexures P -6 and P -7. He prays for allowing the petition.