Ashok Jain vs Narcotics Control Bureau

Suvra Ghosh, J

The petitioner prays for quashing of the proceedings of NDPS Case No. 117 of 2002, pending before the Court of the Learned Special Judge, Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 6th Court, Barasat, North 24-Parganas.

Pursuant to specific information, the officers and staff of the Narcotic Control Bureau intercepted a person on 03.10.2002 in front of his house at SA-84, Sector II, Salt Lake City while he was coming out of his house with a bag. He disclosed his name as Ramesh Giri and subsequently his name was found to be Ansar Rahaman. Upon searching, 3.5 kilograms of heroin was recovered from his person and some documents and Indian currency worth Rs. 16,000/-were recovered from his bed room. A Maruti 800 car belonging to Ansar Rahaman which was purchased with the money accumulated from drug business was also seized. The rented flat was in the name of one Rupa Giri, wife of Deepak Giri. As a follow up action, another rented house under possession and control of Deepak Giri was searched and 50 kilograms of heroin was recovered therefrom along with other documents.

In reply to a notice under Section 67 of the Narcotics Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, Ansar Rahaman appeared before the NCB officers and stated that he used to collect narcotics drugs from various persons including the present petitioner. The petitioner has been arraigned in the case on the basis of the statement of accused Ansar Rahaman and no other incriminating material was found against him.

It appears that the petitioner was detained in Arthur Road Jail, Mumbai in connection with the case pending before the Learned Narcotics Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, Special Court, 48, P.N. Kashalkar Court at Mumbai and was produced before Barasat Court on the strength of Production Warrant. The petitioner was acquitted from the case before the Mumbai Court on 13.12.2007 and released from the prison. The petitioner was not aware that the present case was still pending until a warrant of arrest was issued against him in the said case.

Referring to the statement of Ansar Rahaman, the learned advocate for the petitioner has pointed out that it was the version of the accused that the petitioner used to supply heroin to him. The principal accused Ansar Rahaman and Deepak Giri were convicted and the other two accused persons Bhagwan Singh and Bhairon Singh whose names were taken by the principal accused along with that of the petitioner, have already been acquitted. The house of the petitioner was found under lock and key and no criminal antecedent of the petitioner was revealed on inquiry. Subsequent raid of the petitioner's house also did not lead to anything suggesting his involvement in the alleged offence.

The opposite party/Narcotics Control Bureau has submitted that commercial quantity amounting to 50 kilograms of heroin was recovered from Ansar Rahaman and his statement under Section 67 of the Narcotics Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, led to tagging of the petitioner in the case. The petitioner was found absconding and did not co-operate with the investigation of the case.

The documents on record suggest that about 50 kilograms of heroin which comes within the purview of commercial quantity were recovered from the house and person of the principal accused persons Ansar Rahaman and Deepak Giri. The name of the petitioner transpired from the statement of Ansar Rahaman under Section 67 of the Act. Raid was conducted in the house of the petitioner but the petitioner was not found. In all probability, the petitioner was then in custody at Arthur Road Jail, Mumbai in connection with the Narcotics Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act case in Mumbai. No criminal antecedent of the petitioner or his involvement in any kind of smuggling or drugs business transpired during investigation. No contraband article was also recovered from him. Though Ansar Rahaman referred to the petitioner as one of the suppliers of heroin, the said statement does not find any corroboration or proof. The two other accused persons who appear to be standing on the same footing as the present petitioner were acquitted earlier.

The opposite party does not seriously oppose the fact that the name of the petitioner transpired only from the statement of a co-accused and there is no other material to implicate him in the present case.

It is trite law that jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code ought to be exercised with extreme care, caution and circumspection and should not be used to stifle or axe down a legitimate prosecution. But at the same time, the court should not hesitate to quash any proceedings which may amount to abuse of the process of law.

In the case in hand, allowing the proceedings to continue shall be a futile exercise and shall amount to abuse of the process of law. The petitioner cannot be allowed to suffer the ordeal of trial and languish in court without any cogent material being found against him or any prima facie case being made out against him.

In the premise, proceedings of Narcotics Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, Case No. 117 of 2002, pending before the Court of the Learned Special Judge, N.D.P.S. Act, 6th Court, Barasat, North 24-Parganas under Sections 21 (c)/29 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act is hereby quashed.

CRR 2589 of 2018 is allowed accordingly.

There will be no order as to costs.

Urgent certified website copies of this judgment, if applied for, be supplied to the parties expeditiously on compliance with the usual formalities.