The High Court · 2025

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Grounds of Criminal petition and upon hearing the Sri D.Sudharshan, Advocate for the petitioner and the Sri Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondents Memorandum of arguments of D.Arun Kumar, The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE I(. SUJIrNA CRIMINAL PETITIO N NO.4245 0F 2025 ORDER: This, Crirninzrl Petition is filed undcr SecrtilI 5:lii Rharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (l rr slrort ti'rF) "'i BNSS) to quash the proceeclings zrgainst the pctit i) lL-r/itr)('ll1i'j(l No.6 in S.Cl.NDPS.No-3O8 oI 2024 on the filc cr il Ari iiri ;'i'l Metropolilan Scssions Judgc, Nampally, Hr " tabttti' I ir,' offences eLllcgcd against the pctilioner zrre utnclt:l '; 'f i i1 I 'l ir:l rlw.2O (1, (ii) (A), 22 (b) and 27 o[ Narcct ' ]Jr rrlrs '1r--(i Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

2. Hca.rd Sri D.Sudharshan, lcaruecl coi rr'i-'l i 'i petitioncr iis rvell as Sri D.Arlin Kumar, Ie:rrr ':'l '^'t1'ltrir'l-L:;i Public Proscctttor for responclcnts Perusecl the tr rI rl ir.

3. Lcarttecl counsel for tl'tc pctitiolle r subn' l( d tlrtr: -i!' matter is sqLlarely covered bY thc ordcr dated .l.O-1..,i.r-::, Lir Crimrnal Pctition No.2753 of 2O25. Lcarnecl Additional Pr-rblic Prosecutor also rL:lrmiLi.,.i : i,at 1. the issuc: in the prescnt criminzrl pctiLion is c "'':rr (l lr'' Iiri: earlier or,lcr in the atrove crin-rinal petition. t I 2 5 In view, of thc said representation and as thc matter is sqr-rareli' covered by the orcier in the above criminal petition, this crirninal petition is allorr"'r:ci in terms of the a.bove said order, ailr;pting the reasoning contained therein. The proceedrngs :rgiiinst the petitioner/ accused No.6 in S.C.NDPS.No.3O8 of 2024 on tl're file of II Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, litinpalll', I{yderabad are hcreblr quashed. Pending miscellancous petilions, if any, shal1 stand 'ilnsed I I To, //TRUE COPY// Sd/- M, NAGAMANI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR se$ffi oFFrcER

1. The Xl Additional Chief [Vletropolitan Magistrate at Secunderabad' Z. fne Station House Officer, Kdrkhana Police Station, Hyderabad' 5. r*" bci to tn. public prosecutor, High court for the state of Telangana at a. Ohe CC to Sri D.Sudharshan, Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CD CoPies. 6. ll MSJ at Nampally, HYderabad. Hvderabad [OUTI (Alongwith a copoy of order passed dated ?.510212025 in CRLP No 27 53/2025) NVB/gh (r HIGH COURT DATED:131OG12025 t .a- l'<o 15 SEP ZrUs * Sa4-6; -t -r .,, {\ ORDER CRLP.No.4245 ot 2025 i II I i i i I ALLOWING THE GRIMINAL PETITION I (A- l3 4. D r_. THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.2753 of 2025 ORDER: This Criminal Petition is fi1ed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhitha, 2023 (for short 'BNSS), by the petitioners-accused Nos.10 to 12 seeking to quash the proceedings against them in S.C.NDPS.No.3O8 of 2024 on the file of II Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge at Nampally, Hyderabad, pertaining to Crime No.165 of 2024 of P.S. Karkhana. The offence alleged against the petitioners is under Section 27 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short 'Act, 1985').

2. Heard Mr. T.Pradyumna Kumar Reddy, learned Senior Counsel representing Mr. T.Anirudh Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State and perused the record.

3. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on receiving credible information that two persons were under the influence of psychotropic substance at the scene i.e., Dhobi Ghat, Sikh Village, Secunderabad, the Police, Karkhana went \ffi \: -i-# t\ 2 sKs,I Crl.P.No.2753 oI Z02S there and found accused Nos.6 and 7 i:t an unstable condition. After sometime, accused Nos.2 to .l came there to supply drrrgs to accused Nos.6 to 7, however. they were also apprehended by the Police. In their confes,sron, the said accused ,:onfessed that the petitioners-accusr d Nos.10 to 12 and other accused are customers. Basing on t;re same, a case in Crimt: No.165 of 2024 was registere 1 against the petitioners and others. After completion ol investigation, charge sheet rvas fi1ed, cognizance was takerr and the case was num3ered as S.C. NDPS No.3O8 of 2024

4. Lea.:ned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners were neither :rriested at the scene of offence nor anything was seiz:o liom their possession, however, mereiy basing on the conlession of co-accuse d, the petitioners were falsely implic: ted in the case. He further submits that the blood samples of retitioners were not colle,:ted to establish that they are ir L the habit of consuming narcotic drugs and the only witnesses in the present case are the Police officers and panrhas. Learned Senior Counsel relied on the judgment r I the Hon'bie ---.i,.4 ,J 3 sKs.l Crl,P.No,2753 ol2025 Supreme Court in Tofan Singh a. Sto:te of Tamil Nadul, wherein, it was held that the confessional statements recorded under Section 67 of the Act, 1985, will remain inadmissible in the trial of an offence under the Act, 1985 Hence, he prayed to quash the proceedings against the petitioners.

5. On the other hald, learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the petition stating that specihc allegations are levelled against the petitioners and the truth or otherwise of the allegations levelled against the petitioners can only be known after conducting full-fledged trial before the trial Court, and hence, he prayed to dismiss the petition.

6. Having heard both sides and perused the material on record, it appears that the petitioners-accused Nos.10 to i2 are consumers, they were not arrested at the scene of offence and nothing was seized from their possession, however, the petitioners were arrayed as accused in the crime basing on the confession statement of co-accused. Further, this Court quashed proceedings against accused No.5 in Criminal Petition No.1 1743 of 2023, with similar offences. Considering ' (2021) 4 scc I 4 SKS,I t:rl.P.No.2753 of 2025 the sam,3, the continuation of proceedinl;s against the petitioners amounts to abuse of process of larv and the same are liable to be quashed

7. Acc,rrdirrgly, this Criminal Petition is allowed and the proceedin gs eigainst the petitioners-accused l,los. 1 O to 12 in S.C.NDPS;.No.308 of 2024 on the file o1 II Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge at Nampally, Ivderabad, are hereby qtrashed Pending miscellaneous petitions, if arr1, shail stand closed Date: 25.t)2.2025 I{, SUJANA, J