MOHAMMAD ABASS MAGRAY Vs. UNION TERRITORY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mr. Mubashir Malik, learned Dy. AG appears in the matter on behalf of the respondent. Response, if any shall be filed by the next date of hearing.

(2.) Heard the learned counsel for the applicant-petitioner in respect of his prayer for grant of interim relief in applications bearing CrlM Nos. 244/2025 and 245/2025. It is inter alia submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant-petitioner that the FIR bearing No. 222/2010 came to be registered with the Police Station Anantnag way back on 31/5/2010 under Sec. 6/13 of Drugs and Cosmetics Act and 3/7 of Essential Commodities Act in which the petitioner came to be bailed out by the competent Court on 1/6/2010. That the investigation in the case continued till 22/2/2025 for a period of about 15 years when the Police Station concerned presented the final report in terms of Sec. 173 Cr.PC corresponding to Sec. 193 of BNSS before the learned Special Judge designated under NDPS Anantnag. The learned trial court through its order dtd. 22/2/2025, passed on the final report/challan returned the same as being not in accordance with law. It has been pin pointed by the learned trial court in its order that the investigation in the case which started initially under the offences falling under Cosmetics and Drugs Act and Essential Commodities Act continued to be going on for a period of fifteen years and at the fag end of the investigation, offence under 8/21 of the NDPS Act came to be added in case FIR.

(3.) The learned counsel submits that the registration of the case FIR in question as well as the final report culminating from the same appears to be the gross and patent abuse of process of law deserving to be quashed to meet the ends of justice in view of the provisions of the law as contained under 482 Cr.PC corresponding to 528 of BNSS. He further contends that the petitioner-accused was bailed out by the competent Court on the next day of registration of FIR and arrest and now he cannot be re-arrested after a long gap of fifteen years in the same case FIR under a different offence.