- (1.) The instant revision application arises out of the order dated 7th August, 2003 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 2nd Court, Hooghly in N.D.P.S. Case No. 7 of 2002.
(2.) The facts anterior to filing of the instant revision application may briefly be narrated thus.
(3.) The present petitioner Samir Ganguly is an'accused in N.D.P.S. Case No. 7 of 2002 which was initiated on the basis of a written,complaint made by Shri Sadananda Mondal, Intelligence Officer attached to Narcotic Control Bureau, Eastern Zone Unit, Calcutta. It is the contention of the petitioner that since the above noted case is not instituted on the basis of a police report and the same is a warrant case instituted otherwise than on police report, the procedure laid down under Sections 244 to 247 of the Code of Criminal Procedure should be followed in the instant case. It is the grievance of the petitioner that since the learned Additional Sessions Judge who has been empowered to try the instant case under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), in absence of the Special Court, had not followed the procedure enumerated under Sections 244 to 247 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in a case of like nature which has been instituted otherwise than on police report, the petitioner filed the petition before the learned Additional Sessions Judge praying for following the procedure as enumerated in the Code of Criminal Procedure with regard to the trial of warrant cases instituted otherwise than on police report. But the learned Additional Sessions Judge disallowed such prayer made by the accused petitioner whereupon being aggrieved the petitioner has preferred the instant revision application.;