The Punjab and Haryana High Court has ruled that recovery of medicines from a location slightly different from the licensed premises, by itself, cannot establish criminal liability under the NDPS Act, especially when the accused is a duly licensed dealer.
The Punjab and Haryana High Court discharged a licensed medicine dealer in a case under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act.
Justice H S Grewal delivered the order allowing the revision petition of Anil Kumar Kaushik and setting aside the decision of the special judge at Faridkot dated Feb 25, 2022.
Kaushik, a proprietor of a medical store in Delhi, sought discharge in an FIR registered on May 23, 2021 at the Kotkapura City police station in Faridkot district under the NDPS Act. He argued that his name was included in the FIR only on the basis of the disclosure made by Harjinder Singh alias Kala, who was arrested on May 23, 2021 along with Jaspal Singh alias Rinku.
The prosecution case was that they were found carrying 31,020 intoxicant tablets in a light commercial vehicle near Mandi Gate, Kotkapura.
Counsel for the petitioner contended that Kaushik was falsely implicated and had no link to the alleged offence. The court was also told that the petitioner had been roped in solely due to the disclosure of a co-accused, which, in the absence of corroboration through independent evidence, carries no substantive evidentiary value.
The petitioner further submitted that there was no independent material connecting him to the alleged recovery from the vehicle, and therefore the essential legal ingredients required to invoke NDPS provisions against him were not established.
After hearing the arguments, the court noted that the mere supply of medicines by a licensed dealer in the ordinary course of business, without any material indicating conscious knowledge, deliberate concealment, or intentional involvement in illegal activity, cannot on its own make out a criminal case.
Consequently, Justice Grewal allowed the revision petition, set aside the Faridkot special judge’s discharge order in the FIR, and directed that the trial continue against the remaining accused in the case.

