Telangana High Court
Mohd. Abdul Hadi Haleem vs The State Of Telangana on 4 March, 2025
Author: Juvvadi Sridevi
Bench: Juvvadi Sridevi
THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE JUVVADI SRIDEVI
CRIMINAL PETITION No.3114 of 2025
ORDER:
This Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioner-accused No.11
to quash the proceedings against him in S.C.N.D.P.S.No.140 of
2024 on the file of the learned I Additional District and Sessions
Judge, Cyberabad at L.B.Nagar, registered for the offences
punishable under Sections 21(a), 21(b), 22(c), 27 and 29 of the
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act and section 21(a)
of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Amendment Act.
2. Heard M/s. Abdul Wahid Basha, learned counsel for the
petitioner-accused No.11 and Mr. Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned
Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State and perused the
record.
3. As per the case of the prosecution, on 02.02.2024 at
11.10 hours, the Police seized 13 grams of MDMA drug and 10
grams of Cocaine from the accused Nos.1 to 3 near tin shed at open
place, opposite My Home Vihanga Apartment, TNGO’s colony,
Gachibowli , wherein A1 to A3 are drug peddlers and A4 to A23 are
consumers.
2
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that upon the
confession statement of A4, though the petitioner is not present at
the scene of offence and nothing was recovered from his
possession, merely basing on the confession of the accused No.4,
the petitioner was falsely implicated in the case. In support of his
contention, learned counsel relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in Tofan Singh v. State of Tamil Nadu 1, wherein, it
was held that the confessional statements recorded under Section
67 of the Act, 1985, will remain inadmissible in the trial of an offence
under the Act, 1985.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that
the police Gachibowli have conducted a medical test for the
petitioner in the Continental Hospitals at Gachibowli on 02.02.2024,
wherein the Medical test was also reported as “Negative”. Hence, he
seeks to quash the proceedings against the petitioner herein.
6. On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor
opposed the petition stating that specific allegations are levelled
against the petitioner and the truth or otherwise of the allegations
levelled against the petitioner can only be known after conducting
full-fledged trial before the trial Court, and hence, prayed to dismiss
the petition.
1
(2021) 4 SCC 1
3
7. Having heard both sides and perused the material on
record, it appears that the petitioner-accused No.11 was not present
at the scene of offence and nothing was seized from his possession.
As seen from the contents of the charge sheet, during the course of
investigation, the Police have also conducted medical test on the
petitioner which resulted negative. Furthermore, the petitioner was
arrayed as an accused in the crime basing on the confession
statement of co-accused, which is inadmissible in the trial of an
offence under the Act, 1985, as per the Judgment of the Honourable
Supreme Court in Tofan Singh‘s case (supra). In the said
circumstances, the continuation of proceedings against the petitioner
amounts to abuse of process of law and the same are liable to be
quashed.
8. Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is allowed and the
proceedings against the petitioner-accused No.11 in
S.C.N.D.P.S.No.140 of 2023 on the file of the learned I Additional
District and Sessions Judge, Cyberabad at L.B.Nagar, are hereby
quashed.
4
As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any shall
stand closed.
_____________________
JUVVADI SRIDEVI, J
Date: 04.03.2025
Note: CC by 06.03.2025
B/o.
BV
