Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

supported the order impugned and opposed the bail application with the contention that the applicant is found to be in possession of so many tablets containing alprazolam substance. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has reiterated the law in the case of Union of India and Anr. vs. Sanjeev V. Deshpande; 2014 1 MCRC-26037-2018 Cr.L.R. SC 896 wherein it has been held that the gross weight of the drug is to THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT INDORE (Jitendra Hirvay vs. State of MP) be counted and not merely the net percentage/contents of the salt in the medicinal preparation for finding out the actual weight of the psychotropic substance in reference to the schedule under the NDPS Act. Hence, the first argument so advanced is in ignorance of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. He further submits that though only six tablets were sent for chemical analysis, this by itself, shall not justify that the tablets found to be in possession of the applicant did not contain the alprazolam substance. In fact, it was only for specimen testing of the said tablets sent for chemical analysis. However, in the course of time, the entire bulk of the tablets shall be sent for chemical analysis. In any case, today the matter is only posted for consideration of bail application. As such, the aforesaid contention shall not hold water for the purpose of consideration of bail application.

It is submitted that the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act has been enacted to checkmate illicit drug trafficking and drug abuse at national and international level. The offence of the nature in hand is on rise and have caused serious imbalance in social order. The youth of this country is becoming drug addict through the aforesaid camouflaged medicines/tablets giving rise to serious question- mark in the growth and development of young India. Such nefarious activities of holding and selling the alprazolam substance in the form of tablets, if not checkmate, it shall spread the drug addiction in the youth like a cancerous disease. Hence, if in the event the applicant is enlarged on bail, at this stage, the message to society shall be vulnerable in public domain. With the aforesaid submissions, learned counsel prays for rejection of bail application.

Having heard the counsel for the parties and upon consideration of the judgment cited by learned counsel for the parties, in the opinion of this Court, in the light of law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India and Anr. (supra), it is not the net percentage/contents of alprazolam substance in medicinal to be taken into consideration to find out the actual weight of the drugs in reference to the schedule under the NDPS Act. Though this Court refrains from commenting upon merits of the contentions of rival parties but, in the light of such law, the first contention does not hold water and deserves to be rejected. So far as, the second contention is concerned, at this THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT INDORE (Jitendra Hirvay vs. State of MP) stage, since, the prosecution can always sent the remaining tablets for chemical analysis as has been stated at Bar by the Public Prosecutor, the argument that since only six tablets were sent for the chemical analysis, therefore, applicant is not liable for prosecution cannot be accepted. Accordingly, the second contention is also rejected.

In the obtaining facts and circumstances and the fact that the applicant is found to be in possession of 5400 alprazolam tablets and in custody only for 2 & 1/2 months, the application is hereby dismissed, at this stage.

09.07.2018

10. According to entry No. 178 of the notification No.S.O. 2941(E) dated 18/11/2009 by which notification No. S.O. 1055 (E) dated 19.10.2001 has been amended small and commercial quantity for alprazolam is 5 & 100 grams respectively. As per note 4 inserted at the end of this notification, for the purpose of determining the quantity, the gross weight of the drug recovered and not the pure content of the psychotropic substance shall be taken into consideration. Note 4 reads thus: