Justice M. Nagaprasanna, Karnataka High Court
Segregation Of Leaves & Actual Ganja Not Made Before Weighing: Karnataka High Court Quashes NDPS Case Against Man Alleged To Be Cultivating Cannabis
|The petitioner approached the Karnataka High Court challenging the proceedings in a case registered under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.
The Karnataka High Court quashed a case registered under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, against a man who was accused of cultivating 5 to 6 cannabis plants on his property. The High Court noted that the segregation of leaves and the actual ganja was not made before weighing the same.
The petitioner approached the High Court, calling in question the proceedings in a case registered for offences punishable under Sections 20(a) and 20(b)(ii)(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.
The Single Bench of Justice M. Nagaprasanna noted, “Therefore, it is an admitted fact that segregation of leaves and the actual ganja is not made prior to weighing the same and the charge sheet is filed. Therefore, the charge sheet is filed blatantly contrary to law, as laid down by the Apex Court and followed by this Court in the afore-quoted judgments.”
Advocate Jaysham Jayasimha Rao represented the Petitioner while Addl. SPP B N Jagadeesh represented the Respondent.
Factual Background
On an alleged tip-off off a search was conducted in the house of the petitioner, a senior citizen. It was alleged that the petitioner is cultivating 5 to 6 cannabis plants on his property. The search and seizure led to registration of a crime initially for an offence punishable under Section 20(a). The police then conducted an investigation and filed a charge sheet against the petitioner. The concerned Court took cognizance of the offences under Sections 20(a) and 20(b)(ii)(c) and issued summons to the petitioner. Aggrieved thereby, the Petitioner approached the High Court.
Reasoning
The Bench noted that the alleged tip-off led to the search and the search led to seizure or uprooting of the alleged cannabis plants in number weighing 27.360 kgs. It was further noticed that roots, stems, leaves, buds, including a plastic bag, were put to weigh. “While it is a crime to permit cultivation of a cannabis crop in the residential premises, in the case at hand it is in the backyard amongst other weeds, general in nature”, it said.
Reference was made to the judgment in Alakh Ram v. State Of UP (2004) wherein the Apex Court holds that plants sprouted by natural growth do not amount to cultivation. Further, in Kolandaiswamy v. State Of Karnataka (2017), it has been held that the Act requires the parts of the plant to be segregated. When other parts of the plant are also included, it would result in futile proceedings.
“If the facts obtaining in the case at hand are considered on the touchstone of what is held by the Apex Court in the case of Alakh Ram, as followed by this Court in the afore-quoted judgments, the charge against the petitioner must fail for reasons more than one”, the Bench further stated.
The Bench found that the prosecution had not placed an iota of evidence to demonstrate that the petitioner was cultivating ganja, and the quantity of ganja found from the backyard of the petitioner was admittedly weighed along with the entire plants that were uprooted without segregation. The Court also pointed out that the segregation of leaves and the actual ganja was not made prior to weighing the same. Thus, allowing the Petition, the Bench quashed the proceedings initiated against the Petitioner.
Cause Title: Chandrashekar v. State of Karnataka (Case No.: Criminal Petition No.11138 of 2024)
Appearance:
Petitioner: Advocate Jaysham Jayasimha Rao
Respondent: Addl. SPP B N Jagadeesh