Allowed¶¶56

Shri Tanmay v. the State of Karnataka

NDPS Act, S.27(b) – Consumption of ganja – Quashing of criminal proceedings

Karnataka HC21 Aug 2025CRL.P/102012/2025

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka HC, Dharwad Bench (S.Vishwajith Shetty J., 21.08.2025), CRL.P No.102012/2025: quashing of NDPS S.27(b) ganja-smoking case against student accused; presumptive urine screening ('Marijuana'-positive) at DIMHNS Dharwad never confirmed by GC/MS or other alternate method; Yeshvanth v. State of Karnataka (Crl.P.1453/2023) relied on; proceedings in C.C.3232/2024 quashed against Accused No.3; petition allowed.

What did the court decide?

The entire proceedings in C.C. No.3232/2024 (arising out of Crime No.167/2024, Sub-Urban Police Station, Dharwad) under Section 27(b) of the NDPS Act, 1985 stand quashed against the petitioner/Accused No.3. ¶¶56

Shri Tanmay Vs the State of Karnataka — Narcotics (NDPS) | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶56

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire criminal proceedings in C.C. No.3232/2024 under Section 27(b) of the NDPS Act, 1985 against the petitioner/Accused No.3 deserve to be quashed on the ground that the presumptive urine screening test was never confirmed by an alternate method such as GC/MS.

¶¶49

Court's answer

Since the urine test report itself states that the positive result of the urine screening test is presumptive and should be confirmed by alternate methods such as GC/MS, and the prosecution adopted no such confirmatory test, the petitioner cannot be prosecuted in the absence of a proper test report.

¶¶49

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner is a student aged 20 years and no purpose would be served by prosecuting him in the absence of a proper test report; accordingly his prayer to quash the proceedings has to be answered in the affirmative.

¶¶49

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

NDPS Act, S.27(b) — Consumption of ganja — Quashing of criminal proceedings — Petitioner, a 20-year-old student with no criminal antecedents, arraigned as Accused No.3 in C.C. No.3232/2024 (Crime No.167/2024, Sub-Urban Police Station, Dharwad) — Urine test at Dharwad Institution of Mental Health and Neurosciences showed a positive result for 'Marijuana', but the report itself declared the screening result presumptive and required confirmation by alternate methods such as GC/MS — Prosecution conducted no confirmatory test — Following Yeshvanth S/o. Govindappa v. State of Karnataka (Crl.P. No.1453/2023, DD 29.09.2024), held no purpose would be served by prosecuting the petitioner in the absence of a proper test report — Criminal petition under S.482 Cr.P.C. (S.528 BNSS, 2023) allowed; entire proceedings quashed against the petitioner.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC-D:10661 CRL.P No. 102012 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 21^ST DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 102012 OF 2025 (482(CR.PC)/528(BNSS))

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SHRI TANMAY S/O SUSHANT JOSHI, AGE. 20 YEARS, OCC. STUDENT, R/O. BANSHANKARI NAGAR, 1^ST CROSS, DHARWAD, TQ. AND DIST. DHARWAD-580 011.

¶9

… PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. SHIVASHANKARAGOUDA S. PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SHIVRAJ S. BALLOLI, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, THROUGH DHARWAD SUB-URBAN POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH, DHARWAD-580 011.

¶13

Digitally
signed by
RAKESH S
RAKESH HARIHAR
S Location:HIGH COURT
HARIHAR OF
KARNATAKA
DHARWAD
BENCH

¶14

SMT. L.K. KODABAL, AGE. MAJOR, OCC. WOMAN POLICE SUB-INSPECTOR, SUB URBAN POLICE STATION, DHARWAD, TQ. AND DIST. DHARWAD-580 008.

¶15

… RESPONDENTS

¶16

(BY SMT. GIRIJA S. HIREMATH, HCGP FOR R1; R2-SERVED)

¶17

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C. (UNDER SECTION 528 OF BNSS, 2023), PRAYING TO QUASH THE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS IN CC NO.3232/2024 ARISING OUT OF CRIME NO.167/2024 OF DHARWAD SUB-URBAN POLICE STATION FOR THE COMMISSION OF THE ALLEGED OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 27(B) OF NARCOTIC DRUGS AND PSYCHOTROPIC SUBSTANCES, ACT, 1985 PENDING ON THE FILE OF LEARNED PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, DHARWAD IN SO FAR AS THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.3 IS CONCERNED.

¶18

¶19

NC: 2025:KHC-D:10661 CRL.P No. 102012 of 2025

¶20

HC-KAR

¶21

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, ORDER IS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶22

ORAL ORDER

¶23

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY)

¶24

The petitioner in C.C. No.3232/2024 pending on

¶25

the file of Prl. Civil Judge and JMFC, Dharwad, arising out of Crime No.167/2024 registered by Sub-Urban Police Station, Dharwad for an offence punishable under Section 27(b) of the NDPS Act, 1985, is before this Court under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., with the prayer to quash the entire proceedings in the aforesaid case against him.

¶26

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the

¶27

parties.

¶28

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

¶29

the petitioner is a student aged about 20 years having no criminal antecedents. The prosecution has not confirmed the preliminary test report issued in the present case and therefore, petitioner cannot be prosecuted for the alleged offence. He submits that in identical circumstances, this

¶30

NC: 2025:KHC-D:10661 CRL.P No. 102012 of 2025

¶31

¶32

HC-KAR

¶33

Court in CRL.P No.101900 of 2025 has quashed similar proceedings.

¶34

Learned HCGP who has opposed the petition does not dispute the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶35

In the first information it is alleged that on 18.08.2024 when the first informant who is a police officer attached to Dharwad Sub Urban Police Station was on duty, he found few youngsters smoking cigarette and after seeing him, they allegedly tried to run away. On enquiry, the said youngsters alleged confessed about smoking the ganja and therefore, the said youngsters who are students were apprehended and subjected to medical examination and thereafter, FIR was registered against them. Petitioner is arraigned as accused No.3 in the FIR as well as in the charge sheet which is filed in the present case.

¶36

Similar question was considered by this Court in

¶37

the case of YESHVANTH S/O.GOVINDAPPA Vs. THE STATE

¶38

¶39

NC: 2025:KHC-D:10661 CRL.P No. 102012 of 2025

¶40

HC-KAR

¶41

OF KARNATAKA¹ ., and in paragraph No.6 of the said order,

¶42

this Court had observed as follows:

¶43

“6. The prosecution has placed reliance on the certificate issued by the Government Hospital at Birur in support of its allegations against the petitioner that he had consumed narcotic drugs. The doctor in the Government Hospital is not a competent authority to issue any certificate in proof of the allegations and in the absence of chemical examination in a forensic laboratory, there cannot be any certificate that the urine of the accused had tested Marijuana-positive. Under the circumstances, contention of the criminal proceedings against the petitioner for the alleged offence is futile abuse which amounts to abuse of process of law. The petitioner is a student and if the criminal proceedings are allowed to be continued against him, he is likely to be put into greater hardship.”

¶44

In the case on hand, the accused were found smoking cigarettes and since the first informant observed some foul smell, he enquired with the accused, who allegedly had confessed about consuming contraband article allegedly ganja and therefore, FIR was registered against the three named accused for the aforesaid offence.

¶45

1 Crl.P. No.1453/2023, DD: 29.09.2024

¶46

5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:10661 CRL.P No. 102012 of 2025

¶47

HC-KAR

¶48

In the present case, urine test of the petitioner

¶49

was done in Dharwad Institution of Mental Health and Neurosciences, Dharwad and the test result would go to show that the urine had tested positive for a drug known as “Marijuana”. However, in the test report itself, it is stated that the positive result obtained with this urine screening test is presumptive and should be confirmed by alternate methods such as GC/MS. No such alternate method has been adopted in the present case by the prosecution for getting the test report confirmed by a alternative test as suggested in the test report issued by the Dharwad Institute of Health and Neurosciences. The petitioner is a student aged 20 years and no purpose would be served by prosecuting him in the absence of a proper test report.

¶50

Under the circumstances, I am of the opinion that, the prayer made by the petitioner has to be answered in the affirmative. Accordingly, the following:

¶51

¶52

NC: 2025:KHC-D:10661 CRL.P No. 102012 of 2025

¶53

HC-KAR

¶54

ORDER

¶55

(i) The criminal petition is allowed.

¶56

(ii) The entire proceedings in C.C. No.3232/2024 pending on the file of Prl. Civil Judge and JMFC, Dharwad, arising out of Crime No.167/2024 registered by SubUrban Police Station, Dharwad for an offence punishable under Section 27(b) of the NDPS Act, 1985 stands quashed against the petitioner.

¶57

Sd/(S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY)

¶58

JUDGE

¶59

VMB CT:BCK LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 61

Shri Tanmay v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri Tanmay v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Salman S/O Mahamadrafik Mulla Vs the State

Abdul Rehman S/O Gaffasab Farash Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri. Ravi N Alias Ravi Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt. Deeksha Patil Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri. Navaj Ahamad Shaikh S/O Abdul Shaikh Vs Suprabhate Credit Co-Op Society Ltd. Ankola

Sri. Basavaraj S/O Sangappa Biserotti Vs the State of Karnataka