Skip to content


Mohammad Feroz Vs. State of Punjab - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citation

Court

Punjab and Haryana High Court

Decided On

Appellant

Mohammad Feroz

Respondent

State of Punjab

Excerpt:


.....record and the aforesaid citations. as per prosecution version, 1.100 kg. 'charas' has been recovered from the petitioner which is admittedly commercial quantity. the report of chemical examiner is also placed on record. as per said report, narcotic recovered from the petitioner has been reported as 'charas'. the judgments cited by learned counsel for the petitioner, having distinguished facts, will not apply in the present case at this stage. there is nothing on the record to show that the report of chemical examiner is incorrect and the recovery effected from the petitioner is no.'charas'. therefore, finding no merit in the present petition, the same is dismissed. 12.09.2013 (inderjit singh) mamta judge malhotra mamta 2013.09.13 14:38 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh criminal misc.not m-30531 of 2013 [3].malhotra mamta 2013.09.13 14:38 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh

Judgment:


IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc.not M-30531 of 2013 Date of decision :

12. 09.2013 Mohammad Feroz ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE INDERJIT SINGH *** Present : Mr.Prashant Vashisth, Advocate, for the petitioner.

*** INDERJIT SINGH, J Petitioner Mohammad Feroz has filed the present petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C.for grant of regular bail in case FIR No.244 dated 08.09.2012, registered at Police Station Focal Point, District Ludhiana City, under Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the report of Chemical Examiner is incorrect and the quantity recovered from the petitioner cannot be held as 'charas'.

In support of his contention, learned counsel cited Division Bench judgment of Himachal Pradesh High Court in 2011 (5) RCR (Criminal) 726 Sunil versus State of Himachal Pradesh and Single Bench judgment of Malhotra Mamta Madhya Pradesh High Court in 2005 (3) RCR (Criminal”

2013. 09.13 14:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh Criminal Misc.not M-30531 of 2013 [2].Ramaswamy versus State of M.P.I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the record and the aforesaid citations.

As per prosecution version, 1.100 kg.

'charas' has been recovered from the petitioner which is admittedly commercial quantity.

The report of Chemical Examiner is also placed on record.

As per said report, narcotic recovered from the petitioner has been reported as 'charas'.

The judgments cited by learned counsel for the petitioner, having distinguished facts, will not apply in the present case at this stage.

There is nothing on the record to show that the report of Chemical Examiner is incorrect and the recovery effected from the petitioner is No.'Charas'.

Therefore, finding no merit in the present petition, the same is dismissed.

12.09.2013 (INDERJIT SINGH) mamta JUDGE Malhotra Mamta 2013.09.13 14:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh Criminal Misc.not M-30531 of 2013 [3].Malhotra Mamta 2013.09.13 14:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //