Dismissed

Harkesh Kumar @ Rakesh v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC22 Oct 2016CRM-M/21096/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner challenged proceedings under the NDPS Act before the Punjab and Haryana High Court via a Section 482 Cr.P.C. petition seeking quashing of an FIR. The Court rejected the plea, holding that recovery of drug substances made out a case and the defence of false implication must be addressed during trial.

What did the court decide?

Petition for quashing of FIR, report, charge sheet and consequential proceedings is dismissed.

Harkesh Kumar @ Rakesh Vs State of Punjab — Narcotics (NDPS) | Punjab & Haryana HC (2016)

¶1

223

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

CRM No.M-21096 of 2015 (O&M) Date of Decision: October 22, 2016

¶4

Harkesh Kumar @ Rakesh

...Petitioner

VERSUS

State of Punjab

...Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJIT SINGH

¶10

Present: Mr.Chirag Kundu, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶11

Mr.Varun Sharma, Asstt. Advocate General, Punjab for the respondent-State.

¶12

¶13

INDERJIT SINGH, J.

¶14

Petitioner has filed this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No.01 dated 02.01.2014 under Section 22 of the NDPS Act registered at Police Station Jaurkian, District Mansa, the report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. and the charge-sheet dated 29.05.2014 and all consequential proceedings.

¶15

Notice of motion was issued and learned State counsel appeared and contested the petition.

¶16

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned State counsel and have gone through the record.

¶17

From the record, I find that as per the FIR, the present petitioner, having a plastic bucket in his hand, was apprehended on the road half kilometer ahead of village Jaurkian. On suspicion he was apprehended and then on search, as per law, narcotic substances were recovered, which Vineet Gulati 2016.10.27 14:54 I attest to the accuracy andcontained 16 vials of Intoxicant Roxcof, 9 vials of Normovet each authenticity of this document Chandigarh

¶18

CRM No.M-21096 of 2015 -2-

¶19

containing 100 ML, in black colour envelop 500 capsules of 5 PM-PRX, 400 tablets of Alprazolam and 400 tablets of Cerisol. The FIR has been registered by the police of Police Station Jaurkian, District Mansa (Punjab).

¶20

The present petitioner alleged that he is a licence holder and chemist in Haryana. It is admitted fact that the petitioner has no licence to possess drugs of any type in the State of Punjab. As per FSL report, the vials have been found containing Codeine Phosphate. Similarly, the other salts i.e. Alprazolam etc. have been found by the analysis of the samples sent to the FSL. These salts have been mentioned in the Schedule attached to the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. In no way, it can be held that no case is made out against the present petitioner or the registration of the FIR is misuse of the process of law.

¶21

Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. The challan has already been presented against the present petitioner after the investigation. The charge has already been framed and the case is fixed for prosecution evidence. The trial Court has already taken the cognizance and the trial is going on and fact regarding false implication is a defence of the petitioner, which he is to prove before the trial Court. At this stage, without any evidence, in no way, it can be held that the petitioner has been falsely implicated.

¶22

In view of the above discussion, I find that no ground is made out for quashing of the FIR. Therefore, finding no merit in the present petition, the same is dismissed.

¶23

October 22, 2016 (INDERJIT SINGH) Vgulati JUDGE

¶24

Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable

¶25

Yes No

¶26

Vineet Gulati 2016.10.27 14:54 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Harkesh Kumar @ Rakesh v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Harkesh Kumar @ Rakesh v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Chand Singh Vs State of Haryana

Rajinder Singh Vs Giani Inderjit Singh & Anr.

Navjot Singh etc. Vs State of Punjab & Anr.

Kulwant Singh Alias Kanta Vs State of Punjab

Ram Singh Vs Mohit Networking Future P Ltd. and Anr.

Gurmeet Singh Dhillon Vs State of Punjab and Another