FSL Report Serves as the Foundation in NDPS Case: P&H High Court

FSL Report Serves as the Foundation in NDPS Case: P&H High Court

While dealing with a petition challenging the Trial Court's order denying the petitioner's application for bail under Section 36-A of the NDPS Act and Section 167(2) Cr.P.C., the High Court of Punjab and Haryana observed that while the Supreme Court and a full Bench of this Court have held that a chargesheet, even if not accompanied by a report of the Chemical Examiner or of the expert, cannot be said to be incomplete. However, it should be noted that the aforementioned cases did not involve an NDPS Act offense.

Justice Gurvinder Singh Gill noted in a plea seeking default bail due to the lack of an FSL report despite the filing of a chargesheet that,

"A case under the NDPS Act can only survive in case the prosecution is able to establish that the article recovered is indeed a contraband and which can only be established on the basis of its chemical examination, which is normally got done through FSL established by the Government."

In cases of injury, hurt, or murder under the IPC, the bench stated that even the ocular version combined with some medical evidence or other circumstantial evidence may suffice to prove the accused's guilt.

Furthermore, the Court noted that the dispute had been referred to a Division Bench and is still pending due to several conflicting judgments. Meanwhile, the accused has been granted bail by several co-ordinate Benches. As a result, the High Court granted relief to the current petitioner.

An FIR was filed against the petitioner under the NDPS Act's Sections 21(b)/27-A/29/61/85, accusing that he was in custody of 15 g of 'Heroin.'. Following an investigation by the police, a report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. was presented before the trial Court, but it was not accompanied by the FSL report.

The 60-day period mandated by the NDPS Act read with Section 167 Cr.P.C. for filing a chargesheet in cases of non-commercial quantity recovery lapsed on April 10, 2022.

Because the prosecution did not file the FSL report by the deadline, the petitioner filed an application on April 26, 2022 before the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Fatehabad, under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. for his release on bail on the grounds that the chargesheet could not be said to be complete in the absence of an FSL report. The trial Court considered the application, but it was dismissed by order on April 28, 2022. This is challenged by filing the current petition.

Case Title: Mukesh Pal @ Makhan Versus State of Haryana

Citation: CRR-1046-2022 (O&M)

Link: https://www.phhc.gov.in/download_file.php?auth=L2RhdGEwMS9hcHAvb3JhY2xlL3Byb2R1Y3QvMTFnL2FwYWNoZS9wZGYvZm8vQ1JSXzEwNDZfMjAyMl8yOV8xMV8yMDIyX0ZJTkFMX09SREVSLnBkZg==


Share this News

Website designed, developed and maintained by webexy