IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. M. No.19120-M of 2010 Date of Decision:8.9.2010 Parkash Chander @ Babi and another .... Petitioners Versus State of Haryana .... Respondent CORAM: Hon'ble Ms. Justice Nirmaljit Kaur Present: Mr. Rakesh Nehra, Advocate for the petitioners. Ms. Priyanka Dalal, A.A.G. Haryana. **** 1.Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2.To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3.Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? NIRMALJIT KAUR, J. (Oral) The present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of impugned order dated 4.5.2010 passed by Judge Special Court, Karnal vide which the application of the petitioners for drawing a second sample from the case property and for sending the same for retesting by any recognized laboratory at Chandigarh so that the percentage of the Narcotic Substance can be ascertained, was dismissed. Learned counsel for the petitioners has relied on the judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court rendered in the case of E. Micheal Raj v. Intelligence Officer, Narcotic Control Bureau 2008(2) R.C.R. (Criminal) 597 which relates to the case of recovery of manufacturing drug to substantiate his arguments that it was necessary for the laboratory to make sure the content/percentage of the narcotic substances as the conviction/sentence depends on the said percentage. It is not disputed that the samples are identified as Charas but the percentage contents of Tetrahydrocannabinol in the Narcotic Substance was not specified in the FSL report. Thus, the percentage quality of the Narcotic Substance so recovered from the petitioners could not be ascertained. However, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State has vehemently opposed the prayer on the ground that judgment rendered in the Crl. M. No.19120-M of 2010 -2- case E. Micheal Raj (Supra) relates to manufacturing drug whereas in the present case admittedly the sample is identified as Charas. Learned counsel for the parties are heard. Lest prejudice is caused to the petitioner, it would be appropriate and in the interest of justice if at this stage order dated 4.5.2010 passed by Judge Special Court, Karnal is set aside and the prosecution is directed to get second sample drawn from the case property and sent the same for retesting from Forensic Science Laboratory, Haryana, Madhuban, Karnal, so that the percentage/contents of narcotic substance can be ascertained. Without expressing any opinion on merits, it is made clear that this order shall be qua only ascertaining the percentage/contents of narcotic substance and not an expression of opinion on the legal issue involved in the present case as to whether the percentage of the narcotic substance and the contents of the Charas was to be taken into consideration for conviction or for the quantum of sentence. The legal issue shall remain open to be decided at appropriate stage. Accordingly, the prosecution is directed to get the needful done within one month from the receipt of the copy of this order. Disposed of accordingly. 8.9.2010 ( NIRMALJIT KAUR ) rajeev JUDGE