HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL PETITION No.1285 of 2010 ORDER: The petitioner-accused approached this Court with a prayer to direct the I Addl. Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge for Cases under N.D.P.S. Act at Chittoor to hear and dispose of Crl.M.P.No.33 of 2010 before taking up N.D.P.S.S.C.No.4 of 2006 for consideration. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner herein is accused in N.D.P.S.S.C.No.4 of 2006 on the file of the I Addl. Sessions Judge-cum- Special Judge for Cases under N.D.P.S. Act at Chittoor and the petitioner is facing trial for an offence punishable under Sectiion 8(c) r/w Section 23 of the N.D.P.S. Act and the Scientific Officer of the Andhra Pradesh Forensic Science Laboratories, Hyderabad, gave an opinion that the samples analysed were found to be crude form of heroin which is popularly known as brown sugar and after completion of trial, the case was posted for trial. At that stage, the petitioner filed Crl.M.P.No.33 of 2010 before the trial Court seeking to send the samples drawn for further chemical analysis to find out the percentage of brown sugar in the material objects lying with the Court and the learned Sessions Judge disposed of the said petition by an order dated 02.02.2010 with a direction to the petitioner to submit arguments both in Crl.M.P.No.33 of 2010 as well as in main N.D.P.S.S.C.No.4 of 2006 to enable the Court to arrive at a just decision. Heard. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Apex Court in E.Micheal Raj Vs. Intelligence Officer, Narcotic Control Bureau[1] held that the percentage of heroin (brown sugar) that is found in the total weight of substance seized is relevant for the purpose of deciding whether the case comes under small quantity or commercial quantity or that in between which is termed as intermediate quantity since varying sentences are prescribed under Section 23 of the N.D.P.S. Act. Here in this case, the evidence of percentage of heroin is lacking. However, without considering the said aspect, the learned Sessions Judge disposed of the application as stated supra. On perusal of the record, this Court is of the view that at the stage of arguments there is no need of any further examination of the contraband seized. However, relying on the judgment referred to above, the learned counsel is at liberty to raise the points at the time of arguments before the trial Court and once the prosecution fails to establish the percentage of heroin in the seized contraband, he can take advantage of the same and the learned trial Judge shall also consider the same in proper perspective. With the above observations, the Criminal Petition is disposed of. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, filed shall stand closed. __________________ RAJA ELANGO, J 23rd March, 2011 CBS HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL PETITION No.1285 of 2010 (Disposed of) 23rd March, 2011 CBS [1] (2008) 2 Supreme Court Cases (Cri) 558