Bail NDPS- Buprenorphine and Pheniramine Maleate (Avil)-Judgments

Sr.no.

Title

Relevant Findings

1.

2022 (1) Law Herald 735

PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

Before:- Anoop Chitkara, J.

CRM-M-2569 of 2022. D/d. 03.02.2022.

Charanjit Kaur – Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab – Respondent

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 439 – Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Rules, 1985, Rule 66(a) – Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Rules, 1985, Sections 21 and 37 – Regular Bail – Recovery of one gram of heroin and 15 injections of Buprenorphine and 15 injections of Avil – Held, reference to Rule 66 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 would prima facie makes out a case for bail – Hence grant of regular bail.

[Para 5]

2.

2022 (1) Law Herald 548

PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

Before:- Mr. Raj Mohan Singh, J.

CRM No.39390 of 2021 in/and CRM-M No.39953 of 2021 (O&M). D/d. 18.01.2022.

Harinder Singh @ Happy – Petitioner

Versus

State Of Punjab – Respondent

Bail – NDPS – Commercial Quantity-Recovery of 48 injections of Buprenorphine of 2 ml each – Interpretation attached to Rule 66 of NDPS Rules would remain debatable-Bail granted.

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 Section 22 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 Section 439 Bail NDPS – Commercial Quantity – Recovery of 48 injections of Buprenorphine of 2 ml each-Petitioner is in custody for 2 years 10 months and 29 days – As per custody certificate, petitioner is also not involved in any other case except the present case – Trial to take time – A person can have 100 doses of such like psychotropic substance would also remain debatable – Bail granted.

[Paras 6, 8 and 9]

3.

2021(1) RCR (Cr) 177

PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

Before:- Jasgurpreet Singh Puri, J.

CRM No. 11612 of 2020 and CRM No. 24686 of 2020 in/and CRM-M No. 13312 of 2020. D/d. 10.11.2020.

Sukhwinder Singh @ Vicky – Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab – Respondents

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Sections 439 and 482 – Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 Sections 22, 37, 61 and 85 Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Rules, 1985, Rule 66 – Recovery of 70 injections of Pheniramine Maleate 10 ml Avil and 70 injections of Buprenorphine Rexogesic 2 ml each – Regular bail – Commercial quantity – Plea of accused that Rule 66 of NDPS Rules possession of less than 100 units of Buprenorphine Rexogesic would not be considered as offence in case same is required for medicinal use – Held, statutory provision presumed to be valid unless same is struck down by Competent Court of law – State granted opportunity and time for filing of reply but same not filed – Petitioner committed offence under Section 22 of NDPS Act would be debatable issue as it is also subject to fulfillment of ingredients of first proviso to Rule 66(2) of NDPS Rules – Petitioner is in custody for more than two years and not involved in any other case at present is also relevant factor – Therefore, petitioner entitled for regular bail.

[Paras 25 to 27]

4.

2019(1) Law Herald 69

PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

Before:- Mrs. Daya Chaudhary, J.

Criminal Misc. No. M – 38986 of 2018. D/d. 19.11.2018.

Nitin Rajput @ Raman – Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab – Respondent

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 Section 22 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 Section 439 Regular bail – Entitlement to – Held, alleged recovery is 12 injections of Buprenorphine – As per proviso to Rule 66 of the NDPS Act, an individual can possess 100 doses of Buprenorphine Hydrochloride – The controversy with regard to Buprenorphine at Serial No.169 of the notification/Schedule of the NDPS Act, would be debatable as to whether it is a psychotropic substance or not – In Kismat Singh v. State of Punjab, 2012 (2) RCR (Criminal) 329 and Ajaib Singh v. State of Punjab, 2012 (2) RCR (Criminal) 330, wherein it was held that Buprenorphine falls under Drugs and Cosmetics Act and the salt has not been included in the Schedule I of the NDPS Rules, whereas as per judgment in case Dilip Kumar Virvani and others v. State of Chattishgarh, 2014 (35) RCR (Criminal) 329, Buprenorphine Hydrochloride is a psychotropic substance within the meaning of Section 2 (xxiii) of the Act – Petition allowed.

[Paras 5 and 6]

5.

2015(25) RCR (Cr) 816

PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

(DB)

Before:- Surya Kant and P.B. Bajanthri, JJ.

CRM-M No. 5207 of 2014. [O&M]. D/d. 4.11.2015.

Saleem Mohd – Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab – Respondent

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 Section 439 Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Rules 1985, Rule 66 – Bail – 22 injections of Buprenorphine were recovered from his house – Petitioner is in custody from last more than two years – Alleged contraband was not recovered from the petitioner’s physical possession as he is said to have got it recovered while in custody – Petitioner relies upon Rule 66 of the Rules, to contend that even without any medical prescription, 100 does of such like Psychotropic substance could be retained by him – Without expressing any final opinion in relation thereto, bail granted.

[Paras 4 and 6]

6.

2018(2) Law Herald 1030

PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

Before:- Mr. Tejinder Singh Dhindsa, J.

C.R.M.-M No. 3684 of 2018 (O&M). D/d. 15.3.2018.

Shakti – Petitioner

Versus

U.T. Chandigarh – Respondent

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 Sections 21 and 22 Regular bail – Recovery of 15 injections of Bupranorphine and 15 injections of Pheniramine Meleate – Trial is at the initial stage whether the possession of the alleged psychotropic substance falls within commercial quantity or not, is to be decided at the time of trial – The first proviso to Rule 66 (ii) of NDPS Rule, 1985, favours the petitioner provided he is able to show at the time of trial that the possession of the substance, was for medicinal use – Moreover, petitioner is not involved in any other case under NDPS Act – Therefore, petition allowed – Bail granted.

[Paras 7, 9 and 10]