JASWANT SINGH Vs. STATE OF H P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant petition, warrants, an, adjudication being meted, vis-a-vis, (a) the aggregate or the total, of, the banned narcotic substance, rather comprising the apposite parameter, for, making a further determination, qua, thereupon, the purported recovery(ies), from, the alleged conscious and exclusive possession of the petitioner, being amenable, for, being categorized, as, (a) commercial quantity or more than commercial quantity thereof, (b) AND the aggregate or the gross weight, of, the entire contents, as, carried in the recovered narcotic substance/charas, likewise constituting the reckonable parameter, for making the apt determination, qua effectuation, of recovery(ies) thereof, from, the exclusive, and, conscious possession, of, the accused, being, hence construable to be (i) small quantity or (ii) more than small quantity or (ii)commercial quantity thereof.

(2.) In FIR No. 18 of 2018, registered against accused/petitioner herein, the FSL concerned (i) qua the 1kg 300 grams of charas allegedly recovered, from, the exclusive and conscious possession of accused Jaswant Singh and Kuldeep Singh, has opined, that the quantity of the purefied resin as found in the exhibit stated as cannabis is 43.01% w/w, hence, prima-facie, the pure content thereof, of, resin as extracted from bulk thereof, falls within, domain, of, less than, the commercial quality thereof, (ii) yet the aggregate weight, of, the narcotic substance/charas, as, recovered from the exclusive possession of the accused, without segregating therefrom, the pure contents, of, purified resin renders, the apposite haul, to fall, within, the domain, of it being construable to be categorized, as, more than commercial quantity, of charas (iii) thereupon reiteratedly also an adjudication, is to be meted qua any apt pure contents thereof, hence, comprising the apt parameter(s).

(3.) Mr. Shivank Singh Panta, learned counsel appearing, for the petitioner, contends, that, with hence cannabis resin, at serial No.23 of, the table appended, with, the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the NDPS Act), and, with a clear, and, candid prescription, borne therein, wherein rather 100g, is specified, as, small quantity thereof, (i) hence, the aggregate quantum only of purified resin, as, borne in the seized bulk of charas, alone, being construable, to be the apt reckonable principle, for making the further determination, vis-a-vis, the narcotic substance/charas recovered, from the exclusive and conscious possession, of the accused, dehors, the total bulk of charas, hence, falling or not falling, within the domain, of, small or more than small or commercial quantity thereof, (ii) specifically, when the table, with, clear explicit hence refers to cannbis, and, omits to make any explicity reference therein, visa-vis, the other part of the charas, carried in the seized charas, rather, being also reckonable, nor , with, the total or aggregate, whereof, of, the entire milli-gram, carried in the seized charas, being mandated to comprise, the justifiable principle, hence, for making, the apt reckoning qua, the seizure falling within the domain of small quantity or more than small or commercial quantity thereof.