The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr.M.P. No. 2477 of 2024 1. Shankar Saw @ Shankar Sao, aged about 28 years, son of Sudarshan Saw 2. Sarojini Devi @ Sarjuni Devi, aged about 51 years, wife of Sudarshan Saw Both are residents of H.No. 28, JP Nagar, Bhuiyadih, P.O. & P.S.- Sitaramdera, Dist.- East Singhbhum Versus ...... Petitioners The State of Jharkhand ….. Opposite Parties For the Petitioners For the State
Legal Reasoning
:Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Adv. :Mr. Bhola Nath Ojha, Spl. PP P R E S E N T HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY By the Court:- Heard the parties. 2. This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 with a prayer for quashing the FIR registered as NDPS Case no. 73 of 2023 arising out of Sitaramdera P.S. case no. 64 of 2023 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 17(a), 21(a), 22(a), 20 (b) (ii) (A) and 29 of NDPS Act, 1985. 3. The allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners along with the co-accused Om Prakash Sahu from whose possessions Brown sugar was seized by the Deputy Superintendent of police were involved in possessing, selling and transporting opium being a drugs and psychotropic substance, in contravention of the provisions of the NDPS Act and on seeing the police, they fled away. 4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case, as though, it is the case of the prosecution that the petitioners fled away from the place of concurrence on 29.04.2023 but on that date, they were in custody in some other case in Jamshedpur, and the allegations 1 Cr.M.P. No. 2477 of 2024 against the petitioners false; the FIR registered as NDPS Case no. 73 of 2023 arising out of Sitaramdera P.S. case no. 64 of 2023 be quashed and set aside. 5. Learned Spl. P.P. on the other hand opposes the prayer for quashing the FIR registered as NDPS Case no. 73 of 2023 arising out of Sitaramdera P.S. case no. 64 of 2023 and submits that the materials available in the record is adequate to prosecute the petitioners and the document of custody in respect of the petitioner no. 1 has only been filed in respect of petitioner no.1 but there is nothing in the record to show that the petitioner no. 2 was not present at the place of occurrence and also the material in the record is inadequate to show that the petitioners were in custody and the genuineness of the said documents in connection of the petitioner no. 1 being in custody in some other case on 29.04.2023, is to be tested; which can only be done in a full dressed trial of the case. It is then submitted that certainly at this nascent stage, when the investigation is going on against the petitioner on serious allegation and the petitioners are absconding, the FIR being NDPS Case no. 73 of 2023 arising out of Sitaramdera P.S. Case no. 64 of 2023 ought not be quashed and set aside. It is next submitted that even Otherwise also there is direct and specific allegation against the petitioners of being indulged in possessing, selling, purchasing and transporting opium, drugs and psychotropic substances hence prima facie case is made out against them. It is lastly submitted that this criminal miscellaneous petition being without any merit be dismissed. 6. Having heard the submissions made at the Bar and after going through the materials available in the record, this court is of the considered view that the undisputed fact remains that there is direct and specific allegation against the petitioners of possessing, selling, purchasing and transporting opium, drugs and psychotropic substances, in criminal conspiracy with the co- accused persons and the contention of the petitioners that the petitioner no. 1 was in custody in some other case and not present 2 Cr.M.P. No. 2477 of 2024 at place of occurrence, is the defence, which the petitioners can take at the appropriate stage but certainly, the same is not a ground to quash the FIR being NDPS Case no. 73 of 2023. It is the settled principle of law, as has been reiterated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, in the case of State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr. vs. Akhil Sharda & Ors. reported in 2022 LiveLaw SC 594, the relevant portion of which, reads as under:- “ Having gone through the impugned judgment and order passed by the High court has set aside the criminal proceedings in exercise of powers under Section 482 CrPC, it appears that the High Court has virtually conducted a mini trial, which as such is not permissible at this stage and while deciding the application under Section 482CrPC. As observed and held by this court in a catena of decisions, no mini trial can be conducted by the High Court in exercise of power under Section 482CrPC, jurisdiction and at the stage of deciding the application under Section 482CrPC, the High Court cannot get into appreciation of evidence of the particular case being considering. (Emphasis supplied) that no mini trial can be conducted by the high court in exercise of its power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. 7. It is also a settled principle of law that in exercise of power under Section 482 of CrPC, the genuine prosecution cannot be stifled with as has been held in the case of Monica Kumar (Dr. )and Another vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and others reported in (2008) 8 SCC 781. 8. In view of the undisputed fact that there is direct and specific allegation of serious nature, against the petitioners of committing the offences punishable under Sections 17(a), 21(a), 22(a), 20 (b) (ii) (A) and 29 of NDPS Act, 1985, this court is of the considered view that this is not a fit case where the FIR registered as NDPS Case no. 73 of 2023 arising out of Sitaramdera P.S. case no. 64 of 2023 be quashed and set aside. 9. Hence, this criminal miscellaneous petition being without any merit is dismissed. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi Dated, the 10th September, 2024 Smita /AFR 3 Cr.M.P. No. 2477 of 2024