State v. Usman Ahmad and others) under Sections
Case Details
Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:132211 (Sl.No.25) Court No. - 79 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 19912 of 2024 Applicant :- Usman Ahmad @ Monu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Prashant Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Anish Kumar Gupta,J.
Legal Reasoning
1. Heard Sri Prashant Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Ramesh Kumar, learned AGA for the State. 2. The instant application u/S 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant seeking quashing of the summoning order dated 30.1.2024 as well as entire proceeding of Complaint Case No.282 of 2024 (State vs. Usman Ahmad and others) under Sections 18(c), 27(b) (ii), 27 (c) of the Drugs and Cosmetic Act, 1940, Police Station-Kotwali Mandi, District-Saharanpur, pending in the court of Special Judge (NDPS Act)/Additional Session Judge, Court No.12, Saharanpur. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that for the same set of allegations, he has already been prosecuted by filing an FIR being Case Crime No.68 of 2021 under Sections 8/21, 22, 25, 26 of N.D.P.S. Act in which the charge-sheet has been filed on 31.3.2021 and charges have already been framed on 6.12.2021 against the applicant herein. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that for the same set of allegations, the instant complaint case has been filed by opposite party No.2 for the offences under the Drugs and Cosmetic Act, in which the summoning order has been passed on 30th January, 2024. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that from the summoning order, application of mind by the Magistrate is not reflected, which is required to be reflected at least to the extent that which accused is being summoned for which offence. Therefore, he seeks quashing of the aforesaid summoning order as well as the entire proceedings of the instant case. 4. Per contra, learned AGA submits that so far as the prosecution under different sets of provisions under the N.D.P.S Act as well as Drugs and Cosmetic Act is not barred as for the offences under N.DP.S. Act, the same can be prosecuted on the basis of FIR and for Drugs and Cosmetic Act, only the complaint case can be filed by the Drug Inspector, therefore, there is no illegality so far as the registration of separate sets of offences and prosecution by the opposite party by filing the complaint case. However, from perusal of the summoning order, learned AGA is not able to demonstrate, which accused has been summoned for which offence as the same is not apparent from the summoning order. 5. Having heard the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, this Court has carefully gone through the record of the case. From the record of the case, it is apparent that in the complaint, it is alleged that on 30th January, 2021, S.I. Vijendra Singh along with his team, was on duty to check the doubtful vehicles then they got information that a Swift Car, which is coming from the Old Chilkana bus-stand, some persons were carrying the narcotic substance. On such information, they checked the said vehicle and found that narcotic drugs on the said vehicles along with the persons, who used to sell the said medicines. During interrogation, they told that medicines are there and when it was informed that medicines were there, then the Drug Inspector Saharanpur Sandeep Kumar was called on the spot and, thereafter, the medicines were examined. All the medicines were of the Narcotics and Psychotropic nature and on the interrogation, the persons disclosed their name as Usman Ahmad @ Monu, Lakhveer Singh, Jasveer Singh and Lalit and all the medicines and all the materials such as mobile, money, etc. were seized and the samples were prepared and the same were sent for examination. Thereupon the FIR under N.D.P.S. Act was registered. Subsequent thereto, after obtaining the report of the samples from the Forensic Science Laboratory, the offence under Section 18 (c)/27 was found to have been proved against the applicant and when thereafter the instant complaint case under Sections 18(c), 27(b) (ii), 27 (c) of the Drugs and Cosmetic Act, 1940, has been registered by the Drug Inspector on 29.1.2023, on which the summoning order has been passed on 30th January, 2024, which reads as under: लखबरर सससह पयत रवमदवस, आज यह पररववद पत अभभययकगण उसमवन अहमद उरर ममनन पयत जररर, " जसबरर सससह पयत रममशचनद, लसलत पयत बवबनरवम, रभव सससह पयत भनपमनद कम भवरद औषसध भनररकक शर लवकय श पसवद जनपद सहवरनपयर दवरव अनतगरत धवरव-18(c), 27(b)(ii), 27(c) औषसध एवस पसवधन सवमगर असधभनयम, 1940 थवनव कमतववलर मणडर मम पसतयत भकयव गयव। सयखबरर सससह पयत कय लदरप, ममनम पररववद पत व अनय समसत पपतत कव पररशरलन भकयव। अभभययकगण उपरमक कम धवरवओस कम अपरवध कव पथम दषयव सवकय उपलबध हह। अतत अभभययकगण उपरमक कम अपरवध कव पररववद कम रप मम दजर भकयव जवतव हह। पररववद पत दजर रसजसटर हम। भवरद उपरमक भवरद उपरमक अभभययकगण दवरव समन तलब हम। नकलम तहयवर हह। पतववलर ववसतम नकय लवत/ 12.02.2024 मयक भकयव जवतव हह।" पररववद पत भदनवनक कम पमश हम। चयभक पररववदर लमक समवक हह। अतत नयवयवलय मम वयभकगत रप सम उपससथत सम 6. From the perusal of the aforesaid summoning order, it is not reflected that which accused has been summoned for which offence, therefore, it appears that same has been passed in a cryptic manner and without application of mind, therefore, in view of the judgment of the Apex Court in Sachin Garg vs. State of UP and another passed in Special Leave to Appeal (Criminal) No.4415 of 2023 dated 30th January, 2024, the said summoning order is not in accordance with law as the same is a cryptic order. 7. In view thereof, the summoning order dated 30th January, 2024, is quashed and the matter is remitted back to the Special Judge (NDPS Act)/Additional Session Judge, Court No.12, Saharanpur, to pass a fresh order in accordance with law.
Decision
8. With the aforesaid observations/directions, the instant application stands disposed of. Order Date :- 14.8.2024 LN Tripathi (Anish Kumar Gupta,J.)