Karnataka High Court quashes proceedings against an engineer's case under provisions of NDPS Act

The Karnataka high court has quashed proceedings against an engineer in a case under the provisions of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act. The court noted that apart from the voluntary statement/confession statement recorded in the course of the investigation, there is no material to show the involvement of the petitioner.

The petitioner Junaid Hussain Haveri, a native of Hubballi and a B Tech graduate from NIT- Surathkal, challenged the cognizance taken by the special court against him for offences under the NDPS Act. The prosecution case is that the Intelligence Officer of Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) received credible information that a speed post parcel from Coimbatore containing drug concealment would reach Marathalli Sub-Post Office in Bengaluru on June 29, 2023. On a written request, the postmaster handed over the parcel to the Investigating Officer. While the shipper address was mentioned as Global Wisdom Centre the receiver address mentioned the name of Junaid Hussain.

The officials found a plastic pouch containing silver foil with 50 blot papers in a printed pattern, which was LSD tablets and the substance weighed around 0.560 gm. After drawing the panchanama, the postmaster was requested to deliver a dummy parcel which was received by Junaid.

It was argued on behalf of the petitioner that he did not know the contents of the parcel and he is pinned down only on the voluntary statement recorded by the Investigating Officer. Another accused Abhay Kumar, who was his previous roommate, had asked the petitioner over phone to collect the parcel and hand it over to him. It was further submitted that as per the transaction details, the petitioner has neither transferred money nor received money. It was further submitted that the high court had quashed proceedings against Abhay Kumar finding noncompliance with the mandatory requirements of section 50A of NDPS Act before undertaking the exercise of controlled delivery.

Justice Nagaprasanna perused the voluntary statements of the petitioner, the other accused and noted that there is nothing to show that the petitioner is involved in the crime other than the voluntary statement/confession statement recorded in the course of the investigation. The court also said that the ground on which proceedings Abhay Kumar was quashed was squarely applicable to the case at hand.

"The unequivocal fact that the petitioner/ accused No.3 is drawn into the web of proceedings only on the voluntary / confession statement of the accused, further proceedings if permitted to continue would become an abuse of the process of law and result in miscarriage of justice. In that light I deem it appropriate to obliterate the proceedings against the petitioner,” the court said.