R.D. BEHL Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ALL the three petitions are filed by the petitioner namely R.D. Behl for registration of the case against respondents 2 to 8 and claiming compensation for false prosecution and also claiming damages of Rs. 10 lacs for his harassment and troubles and for malicious prosecution.

(2.) ACCORDING to the petitioner, he is a Registered Medical Practitioner and practising Ayurvedic medicine at Sadar Bazar, Dhuri. According to him, he was falsely prosecuted in three cases for the offences under Section 18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (herein referred to as the 'Act') during the years 1994 to 1998. All the three cases ended in acquittal. In all the three cases the petitioner was found to be in possession of camphorated opium tincture containing alcohol and morphine which according to the petitioner is required for his profession. Though the respondents knew fully well that the petitioner was not involved in any N.D. P.S. case and that the alleged contraband does not come within the definition of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances, nevertheless the respondents 1 to 8 prosecuted him for the offences under the said Act with a malicious intention. Therefore, he filed these petitions directing the 1st respondent to register a criminal case against respondents 2 to 8 and to pay him a sum of Rs. one lac under Section 250, Criminal Procedure Code for the false prosecution and also to pay a sum of Rs. ten lacs as damages to the petitioner for malicious prosecution.

(3.) IT is further averred in the reply that as per clause (xi)a and (xi)b of Section 2 of N.D.P.S. Act, 1985 such preparations may be treated as opium derivatives and under the Act a manufactured drug means opium derivatives etc. The possession, sale and purchase of manufactured drugs in contravention of the Act is punishable under Section 21 of Chapter IV of this Act. He further averred that sample bottles in FIR No. 156 dated 6.8.1997 showed that they contained 1.2% morphine and 60.10% of ethyl alcohol and other ingredients i.e. meconic and camphor were also present in these samples. Thus, according to the respondents, prosecution is not without any basis.