SANTOSH CHAUDHARY vs STATE

Judgment text excerpt

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment pronounced on: 25 September, 2025 + BAIL APPLN. 2999/2024 SANTOSH CHAUDHARY .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Amjad Khan & Mr. Sumit Kumar, Advocates versus STATE .....Respondent Through: Mr. Aman Usman, APP for the State with SI Ram Pratap, Narcotics Spl. Cell. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA JUDGMENT RAVINDER DUDEJA, J. 1. This is an application under Section 483 Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 [“BNSS”] read with Section 528 BNSS, 2023 filed on behalf of the petitioner for grant of regular bail in Case FIR No. 585/2022 for the offence under Section 20 NDPS Act, registered at PS Malviya Nagar. BAIL APPLN. 2999/2024 Page 1 of 12 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:VAISHALI PRUTHI Signing Date:25.09.2025 17:34:45 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the alleged recovery is of 1040 grams of Charas, but as per the order dated 27.09.2022, passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate under Section 52-A NDPS Act, the net quantity of the recovery was 1.022 grams, out of which, about 50 grams was taken out as sample, so the left over net quantity should be 972 grams. However, the order dated 27.09.2022 shows the remaining narcotic to be 0.924 grams, which clearly shows a huge difference of 48 grams. The discrepancy points out that the alleged recovery is false and fabricated. 3. It is further submitted that the samples were supposed to be sent within 72 hours to the FSL from the date of the alleged seizure of the samples. However, they were sent to FSL with a considerable delay of 23 days on 23.10.2022. Thus, there is a violation of Section 52-A of the NDPS Act. The learned counsel further submits that the prosecution case suffers from multiple violations of mandatory provisions of the N