NDPS coverage depends on chemical composition, so khat leaves containing scheduled psychotropic substances supported prosecution.

Prosecution under the NDPS Act was not liable to be quashed merely because khat leaves were not named in the Schedule, where scientific analysis showed the seized material contained cathinone and cathine, both listed psychotropic substances. The controlling question was whether the material fell within the statutory definition by reason of its chemical composition, not the description used for it. As the natural material contained scheduled substances and was found prima facie to be of commercial quantity, absence of a specific entry for khat leaves did not defeat the proceedings. The quashing petition was rejected and the prosecution was held maintainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether the proceedings under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act could be quashed on the ground that khat leaves were not specifically named in the Schedule, when analysis showed that the seized material contained cathinone and cathine.

Analysis: The seized khat leaves were scientifically found to contain cathinone and cathine, both of which are listed psychotropic substances in the Schedule. The controlling question was not the name by which the material was described, but whether it contained substances bringing it within the statutory definition. A natural material or preparation containing a listed psychotropic substance falls within the definition of psychotropic substance. On the quantity seized, the court also found a prima facie commercial quantity. In that situation, the absence of an express entry for khat leaves by name did not justify quashing the prosecution.

Conclusion: The petition for quashing was rejected and the prosecution was held to be maintainable.

---