BIR CHAND 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 drug, 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 all the seized strips, 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. 100 of 2018, registered against accused/petitioner herein, the FSL concerned (i) qua the lomotil tablets allegedly recovered, from, the exclusive and conscious possession of accused Bir Chand, has opined, qua, each tablet carrying, only, 2.52 mg Diphenoxylate hydrochloride and 0.025mg Atropine Sulphate , (ii) yet the aggregate weight, of, the total tablets, as, recovered from the exclusive possession of the accused, without segregating therefrom, the pure contents, of, Diphenoxylate hydrochloride, and, Atropine Sulphate, renders, the apposite haul, to fall, within, the domain, of it being construable to be categorized, as, more than commercial quantity, of Diphenoxylate hydrochloride, and, Atropine Sulphate, (iii) thereupon reiteratedly also an adjudication, is to be meted qua any apt pure contents thereof, hence, comprising the apt parameter(s).

(3.) Mr. Ashok Kumar, learned counsel appearing, for the petitioner, contends, that, with hence Diphenoxylate occurring, at serial No.44, 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 2 gm, is specified, as, small quantity thereof, (i) hence, the aggregate quantum any of Diphenoxylate, as, borne in each of the seized strips/tables, alone, being construable, to be the apt reckonable principle, for making the further determination, vis-a-vis, the strips/tablets recovered, from the exclusive and conscious possession, of the accused, dehors, the aggregate or total whereat of the contents, of the tablets borne, in each of the seized strips, 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 dephenoxylate, and, omits to make any explicity reference therein, vis-a-vis, the other part of the tables, carried in each of the seized strips, rather, being also reckonable, nor , with, the total or aggregate, whereof, of, the entire milli-gram, carried in each of the seized tablets, 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.