MOHAMMAD AFZAL DAR Vs. SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE BANDIPORA
LAWS(J&K)-2020-12-111
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR (FROM: SRINAGAR)
Decided on December 24,2020

Mohammad Afzal Dar Appellant
VERSUS
Senior Superintendent Of Police Bandipora Respondents




JUDGEMENT

- (1.)The present petition has been filed for quashing of FIR bearing No.38/2019 under sections 8, 21 and 29 of Narcotics Drugs Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short the Act) registered with Police Station, Sumbal as well as proceedings conducted pursuant thereto by the trial court.
(2.)Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after the conclusion of the investigation, challan/charge-sheet has been filed in the court of Principal Sessions Judge, Bandipora (hereinafter to be referred as the trial court) and also charges have been framed against the petitioners on 15.07.2019 for commission of offence under sections 8, 21 and 29 NDPS Act. It is further stated that the FSL report dated 24.04.2019 relied upon by the prosecution clearly reveals that the material allegedly recovered from the petitioners is not the brown sugar as alleged in the charge sheet. The application for grant of bail filed by the petitioners was also dismissed by the learned trial court vide order dated 21.09.2019. The petitioners have also challenged the order dated 15.07.2019, whereby the charges were framed by the learned trial court, primarily on the ground that the FSL report clearly negates the story of the prosecution regarding alleged recovery of brown sugar from the petitioners and on the basis of said FSL report, no offence under the Act is made out and the charges framed by the learned trial court for commission offences under section 8, 21 and 29 of the Act are bad in law and as such, required to be quashed.
(3.)Alongside the present petition for quashing the aforesaid FIR, the petitioners have also filed an application for grant of bail in the above mentioned FIR. Respondent has filed objections to both the petitions for quashing of FIR and grant of bail. The Respondent has virtually supported the orders passed by the trial court on the basis of same reasons those have been furnished by the trial court in both the orders of framing of charge as well as for refusing of bail.
;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.