Mahesh Chandra Sharma, J. - (1.) - This revision petition has been filed by the petitioner against the order dated 8.10.2014 passed by District and Sessions Judge, Dausa in Sessions Case No. 61/2012, whereby the charge under Section 8/15 of the NDPS Act has been framed against the petitioner in Sessions Case No. 61/2012.
(2.) Brief facts of the case are as under: "An FIR No. 76/2010 was registered at Police Station Sivani, District Bhivani, Haryana for the offence under Sections 15, 27A, 29, 30 of NDPS Act and sections 109, 120B IPC, in which it was stated that a truck and Santro Car were allegedly intercepted on 31.5.2010 by Police Personnel of P.S. Sivani, where along-with three persons sitting in the said vehicle namely Rajendra, Sunil and Raju, 47 bags of poppy-straw were recovered. Aside of Rajendra, Sunil and Raju, Umesh alleged to be the purchaser, Amar Singh, relative of Sunil, Surajmal, who had allegedly made the cabin of the truck, Kishan Chand the owner of the truck and the Jaspal, who got the truck financed were also made as an accused along-with the petitioner. The petitioner namely Tofiq @ Naresh @ Tomy was also made an accused, who was alleged to be the Contractor, who supplied the poppy-straw. After investigation, the charge sheet was filed and charges were framed against accused Rajendra, Raju and Sunil for the offence under Section 15 of NDPS Act, while charges were framed against accused Surajmal, Jaspal, Tofiq, Umesh and Amar Singh under Section 27A, 29 of NDPS Act as well as under Section 109 and 120B of IPC. The said case tried as Sessions Case No. 3/2010 before the Addl. Sessions Judge, Bhivani, resulted in acquittal of the petitioner. Thereafter on disclosure statement of Sunil, the co-accused in FIR No. 76/2010, P.S. Sivani, who had stated that he had purchased the poppy-straw from one Naresh, stated to be the Contractor, Plot No. 61 in Vapi, RIICO Industrial area, Dausa was searched on 5.6.2010 by Jagat Singh, I.O. of FIR No. 76/2010, in which it was mentioned that there a godown was found locked and a mill for crushing poppy-straw was found and as per the disclosure statement of Sunil, he had purchased 47 sack of poppy-straw from Contractor Naresh on 31.5.2010. The said go-down was checked and 120 bags of poppy-straw were found and the poppy-straw which had been milled was found in three sacks. In respect of the said search, another FIR No. 62/2010 was registered at P.S. Sainthal, District Dausa. On the said FIR, investigation was conducted and a negative final report was submitted. After the F.R., notice was issued to the complainant Jagat Singh, I.O. of FIR No. 76/2010 in P.S. Sivani, who filed a protest petition. After re-investigation, the police filed a charge sheet against the petitioner finding the offence under Section 8/15 to have been made out against Naresh @ Tofiq @ Tomy. Thereafter cognizance was taken and charges were framed on 8.10.2014. Against the said order dated 8.10.2014 passed by District and Sessions Judge, Dausa, this revision petition was preferred.
(3.) Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has contended that the trial court while framing the charge against the accused petitioner has not considered the earlier F.R. No. 31/2010. The F.R. was submitted on the ground that the premises were duly licensed and the record of poppy straw showed that there was no shortage and no offence was stated to be made out. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further contended that the earlier submitted Final Report and the other material of investigation were not considered by the court below at the time of framing of the charge. He has further contended that the poppy straw was found from the premises being Plot No. F-74A of RIICO Industrial Area, Vapi, Dausa and therefore, inasmuch as the poppy-straw was found from the licensed premises. In view of above, the alleged offence is not made out against the petitioner.;