Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, arrayed as accused No. 2 in a case under Sections 21 and 22 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, challenged the criminal proceedings pending in Special C.C. No. 2063/2022 before the XXXIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru. The case arose from a complaint on 23 September 2021 that drugs were being sold outside a bar and restaurant; a raid led to the arrest of accused No. 1 and seizure of 12.20 grams of MDMA. The police filed a charge sheet against two persons, implicating the petitioner as accused No. 2. The petitioner sought quashing of the FIR, charge sheet, and entire proceedings on grounds of violation of Section 52A of the NDPS Act and reliance on an inadmissible confession statement under Section 67. The petitioner argued that the mandatory procedure for disposal of seized narcotics — inventory and sampling in the presence of a Magistrate — was not followed, and that the confession of a co-accused could not be used against him. The State contended that the procedure had been complied with, as evidenced by the Magistrate’s order sheet, and that any irregularity was not fatal. The High Court examined Section 52A and the record, observing that the order sheet of the jurisdictional Magistrate contained a direction for drawing samples in his presence and a certificate of correctness, thus satisfying the statutory requirement. Relying on the Supreme Court’s clarification in Bharat Aambale v. State of Chhattisgarh, the court held that once inventory and samples are drawn in the presence of the Magistrate, Section 52A stands complied with, regardless of which officer moved the application. On the confession statement, the court noted that even if the statement was inadmissible, that issue could only be decided at trial and could not be a ground for quashing at the pre-trial stage. Consequently, the petition was dismissed, and the proceedings were allowed to continue.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Quashing of Proceedings - Section 482 CrPC - Principles - The High Court under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 or Article 226 of Constitution can quash criminal proceedings if no prima facie case or legal bar, but disputed questions of fact must be determined in trial. Petitioner, accused no. 2, sought quashing of NDPS proceedings alleging violation of Section 52A and reliance on inadmissible confession under Section 67. Held, since trial is yet to commence and evidence is to be adduced, no grounds for quashing; petition rejected. (Paras 13-14) B) Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Section 52A - Disposal of seized narcotics - Mandatory procedure - Section 52A requires inventory and drawing of samples in presence of Magistrate, who certifies correctness, making it primary evidence. In the present case, the order sheet of the Magistrate showed that an application was made, samples were drawn and certified in presence of Magistrate, thus compliance with Section 52A was established. Held, once inventory and samples are drawn in presence of Magistrate, Section 52A is complied with; it is immaterial which officer files the application. (Paras 8-12) C) Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Section 67 - Confession to police officer - Admissibility - Confession statement recorded under Section 67 of NDPS Act is inadmissible against co-accused, but mere recording of such statement does not vitiate proceedings if other evidence exists. The court refused to quash proceedings at this stage, leaving the matter to be decided during trial. Held, proceedings cannot be quashed solely on ground that charge sheet relies on allegedly inadmissible confession statement; matter to be proved in trial. (Paras 4, 13-14)
Issue of Consideration
Whether proceedings under NDPS Act are liable to be quashed for alleged violation of Section 52A procedure and reliance on inadmissible confession statement under Section 67?
Final Decision
Writ petition dismissed. The court held that Section 52A procedure was complied with as evidenced by order sheet showing samples drawn in presence of Magistrate; the challenge based on confession statement is matter of trial; no grounds for quashing at this stage.
Law Points
- Section 52A of NDPS Act mandatory
- inventory and sampling must be done in presence of Magistrate
- once inventory and samples drawn in presence of Magistrate
- Section 52A complied irrespective of who moved application
- confession statement under Section 67 inadmissible against co-accused
- quashing of proceedings under Section 482 CrPC not warranted when trial yet to begin and evidence to be adduced
