CLASS ,NILAMBUR v. STATE OF KERALA

AGAINST THE ORDER IN ST 1419/2023 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST PETITIONER/S: CLASS ,NILAMBUR ALBERT JOSHY AGED 32 YEARS RESIDING AT MALIYAKKAL, PELEMAD (P.O) PALEMAD, MALAPPURAM KERALA STATE, PIN - 679331 BY ADVS. REGINALD VALSALAN ANN MARIA FRANCIS RESPONDENT/S: STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031 OTHER PRESENT: SMT. SREEJA V. (PP) THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON

30.01.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: CRL.MC NO. 920 OF 2024 2 BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J. --------------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No.920 of 2024 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 30th day of January, 2024 ORDER Petitioner is the accused in S.T.No.1419/2023 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Nilambur, arising out of O.R.No.18/2023 of Nilambur Excise Range Office, Malappuram.

Petitioner is alleged to have been in possession of 12 gram of ganja and 0.349 mg. of MDMA and was arrested on 15.05.2023 and thereby committed the offences under Section 22(a), 8(c) and 20 (b) ii (A) of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

Sri. Reginald Valsalan, learned Counsel for the petitioner contended that the mandatory procedure required under Section 50 of the NDPS Act has not been complied with by the Investigating Officer and therefore, the very basis of the prosecution itself is faulty and hence the prosecution proceedings ought to be quashed in exercise of the jurisdiction under 482 Cr.P.C. It was further submitted that the alleged chance recovery of the contraband is practically impossible of belief, going by the prosecution version itself and therefore, no purpose would be achieved by continuing the prosecution.

I have heard Smt. Sreeja V., learned Public Prosecutor as well. The contentions raised by the petitioner relating to non- compliance of the mandatory provisions under Section 50 Cr.P.C. and also CRL.MC NO. 920 OF 2024 3 with regard to the chance recovery, are all disputed facts which will have to be considered after appreciation of evidence. Recourse to Section 482 Cr.P.C. in the circumstances of the case is not legally tenable.

Accordingly, I do not find any merit in this Crl.M.C. and it is dismissed. jm/ sd/ BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE CRL.MC NO. 920 OF 2024 4 APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 920/2024 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure-A1 Annexure-A2 TRUE COPY OF THE CRIME OCCURRENCE REPORT IN NDPS CR NO.18/2023 FILED BY THE KERALA STATE EXCISE DEPARTMENT TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT REPORT FILED BEFORE THE JUDICIAL 1ST CLASS MAGISTRATE NILAMBUR ALONG WITH DOCUMENTS