Telangana High Court
Bashapaga Pavan Raj, vs The State Of Telangana, on 21 August, 2025
1
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA
CRIMINAL PETITION No.10304 OF 2025
ORDER:
This Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioners – accused
Nos.3 to 5 seeking to quash the proceedings in COR No.61 of 2025
on the file of Prohibition and Excise Station, Ameerpet, registered
for the offence under Section 8(c) read with Section 22(b) of NDPS
Act, 1985.
2. Heard the submissions of Sri Thakur Rishab Dev Singh,
learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Jithender Rao
Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the
respondent – State.
3. The learned petitioners counsel has submitted that the
petitioners are facing false allegations under Sections 8(c) read with
Section 22(b) of NDPS Act. The learned counsel has further
argued that they have the CC footage which discloses that they
were picked up from their residence and a false panchanama has
been conducted by the police. Therefore, he prayed to quash the
same.
2
4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that
during the course of investigation contraband was seized from the
petitioners herein and that the investigation is still in progress and
hence, prayed to dismiss the petition.
5. Perused the record.
6. The record discloses that on credible information, the police
went to Golden Cave Restaurant & Bar, Ameerpet Road,
Punjagutta and apprehended A1 to A5 and also have seized 1.14
grams of MDMA from the possession of petitioners/accused 3 to 5.
The petitioners counsel has filed a set of photographs stated to
have been obtained from the CC footage. However, the evidentiary
value of the said photographs would be tested during the course of
trial.
7. The learned counsel has relied upon a decision of the Apex
Court in State of Haryana and others v. Bhajanlal and others 1.
In the said case, the Apex Court had elaborately considered the
scope and ambit of Section 482 CrPC/Article 226 of the Constitution
in the context of quashing the criminal proceedings. In para 102,
the Apex Court enumerated seven categories of cases where
1
1992 Supp(1) Supreme Court Cases 335
3
power can be exercised under Article 226 of the
Constitution/Section 482 Cr.P.C by the High Court for quashing the
criminal proceedings. Para 102 is as follows:-
“102. In the backdrop of the interpretation of the various
relevant provisions of the Code under Chapter XIV and of the
principles of law enunciated by this Court in a series of
decisions relating to the exercise of the extraordinary power
under Article 226 or the inherent powers under Section 482 of
the Code which we have extracted and reproduced above, we
give the following categories of cases by way of illustration
wherein such power could be exercised either to prevent
abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the
ends of justice, though it may not be possible to lay down any
precise, clearly defined and sufficiently channelised and
inflexible guidelines or rigid formulae and to give an
exhaustive list of myriad kinds of cases wherein such power
should be exercised.
(1) Where the allegations made in the first information report
or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and
accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any
offence or make out a case against the accused.
(2) Where the allegations in the first information report and
other materials, if any, accompanying the FIR do not disclose
a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police
officers under Section 156(1) of the Code except under an
order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section 155(2) of
the Code.
(3) Where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or
complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same
do not disclose the commission of any offence and make out a
case against the accused.
(4) Where, the allegations in the FIR do not constitute a
cognizable offence but constitute only a non-cognizable
offence, no investigation is permitted by a police officer without
an order of a Magistrate as contemplated under Section
155(2) of the Code.
4
(5) Where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so
absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no
prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is
sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused.
(6) Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the
provisions of the Code or the Act concerned (under which a
criminal proceeding is instituted) to the institution and
continuance of the proceedings and/or where there is a
specific provision in the Code or the Act concerned, providing
efficacious redress for the grievance of the aggrieved party.
(7) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with
mala fide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted
with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused
and with a view to spite him due to private and personal
grudge.”
8. It was also held in the said case that power of quashing a
criminal proceeding should be exercised very sparingly and with
circumspection and that too in the rarest of rare cases. The
extraordinary or inherent powers do not confer an arbitrary
jurisdiction on the court to act according to its whim or caprice. The
court will not be justified in embarking upon an enquiry as to the
reliability or genuineness or otherwise of the allegations made in the
FIR or the complaint.
9. In the present case, the allegations made in the FIR do prima
facie point out an offence under Section 8(c) read with Section
22(b) of NDPS Act, 1985 against the petitioners. Hence, it is
opined that it is not a fit case to quash proceedings.
5
10. In the result, the Criminal Petition is disposed of directing the
police concerned to conclude the investigation at the earliest,
strictly in accordance with law. Further, the petitioner shall co-
operate with the police as and when required for the purpose of
investigation.
Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand
closed.
____________________________
JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA
Date: 21.08.2025
ns
[ad_1]
Source link