NDPS charge framing can proceed on strong suspicion and prima facie material linking the accused to conspiracy and transport

At the stage of framing charge under the NDPS Act, a court may proceed where the record discloses a prima facie basis and strong suspicion of involvement, including in conspiracy to illegally possess or transport heroin. The Court relied on a co-accused's Section 67 statement and identification of the petitioner's photograph as sufficient material to support the charge, and held that detailed proof was not required at that stage. On that basis, the charge was not found groundless and the request to quash it was rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether the charge framed under the NDPS Act for alleged conspiracy to illegally acquire, possess and transport heroin was groundless and liable to be quashed at the revisional stage.

Analysis: The material before the Court included the statement of a co-accused under Section 67 of the NDPS Act and his identification of the petitioner's photograph, which was treated as creating strong suspicion of the petitioner's involvement. At the stage of framing of charge, the Court found that detailed proof was not required and that the existence of a prima facie basis for proceeding was sufficient. On that material, the inference that the petitioner was involved in transport and conspiracy relating to the contraband was held to be a proper basis for the charge.

Conclusion: The charge was held not to be groundless and the petition seeking its quashing was rejected.

Ratio Decidendi: For framing of charge, a court may proceed where the record discloses strong suspicion and a prima facie basis of involvement in the alleged offence, including conspiracy under the NDPS Act.

---