Karnataka HC Quashes NDPS Case Against Senior Citizen After Cannabis Plants Were Found Growing In His Backyard
The Karnataka High Court has quashed a case registered against a 67-year-old man living in Jayanagar area of Bengaluru who was accused of cultivating 5 to 6 cannabis plants in the backyard of his property.A single judge, Justice M Nagaprasanna allowed the petition filed by Chandrashekar, and quashed the case registered against him under Sections 20(a) and 20(b)(ii)(c) of the Narcotic Drugs...
The Karnataka High Court has quashed a case registered against a 67-year-old man living in Jayanagar area of Bengaluru who was accused of cultivating 5 to 6 cannabis plants in the backyard of his property.
A single judge, Justice M Nagaprasanna allowed the petition filed by Chandrashekar, and quashed the case registered against him under Sections 20(a) and 20(b)(ii)(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.
The court said “The prosecution has 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 prosecution alleged that on a tip off they conducted a search in the house of the petitioner, on 01-09-2023, on an allegation that the petitioner is cultivating 5 to 6 cannabis plants in his property. The search and seizure led to registration of a crime the police then conducted further investigation and filed a charge sheet against the petitioner.
The petitioner argued that the police had seized 5 cannabis plants amongst other general weeds that were grown in the backyard of his property. At best, it could be cross pollination. Moreover, there is no evidence placed on record which would depict cultivation of the cannabis plant.
Further, while weighing the plants that were taken, they are not segregated to what would become cannabis and 5 plants, all together with roots, stems, leaves and buds are weighed at 27.360 kgs, which according to him, is completely contrary to law.
The prosecution opposed the plea contending that the police have seized plants and the amount of cannabis involved in the seizure is a matter of trial. Charge sheet has been filed, prima facie, the petitioner is guilty of cultivation.
Findings:
The bench on going through the records noted that if what was seized and the summary of the chargesheet are read in tandem, it would become an admitted fact that roots, stems, leaves, buds including plastic bags were put to weight.
Relying on the Apex Court judgment in the case of Alakh Ram v. State of U.P (2004)1 SCC 766, wherein the court held that plants sprouted by natural growth does not amount to cultivation.
The bench said “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.”
Allowing the petition it held “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.”
Appearance: Advocate Jaysham Jayashimha Rao for Petitioner.
Additional State Public Prosecutor B N Jagadeesh for Respondent
Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 164
Case Title: Chandrashekhar AND State of Karnataka
Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION No.11138 OF 2024