( A ) Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (61 of 1985) S. 22 — Possession of psychotropic substance — Re-testing of sample — Sample earlier sent to Deputy Chief Chemist (Dy. C. C.) — Samples sent for re-testing to Central Forensic Laboratory CFSL on ground that report of Dy. C.C. was inconclusive — Permission of court necessary. 2013 (2) ABR 935, Rel. on.In the absence of any provision in the NDPS, Act enabling the investigating agency to do so, the sending of the second set of samples for retesting to the CFSL, Hyderabad was not permissible, except in accordance with the law laid down by the Supreme Court of India in the case of Thana Singh’s case under no circumstances, the second set of samples could be forwarded to the CFSL without obtaining any permission from the court. (Paras4748)
( B ) Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (61 of 1985) S. 22 — Posse-ssion of psychotropic substance — Re-testing of sample — Result of testing of sample by Field Testing Kit showing that substances was found to be Methaqualone — Report received from Deputy Chief Chemist Dy. CC was that substance was not found to be Methaqualone but what it was could not be identified — Cognizance of offence was taken by trial court on ground that report of Dy. C. C. was inconclusive — Data sheets of report were not supplied to court hence impression was created that report was inconclusive — Case capable to taking cognizance was made out only on basis of test by Field Testing Kit which was subsequently proved to be wrong — Samples were sent to CFSL for re-testing without taking permission of court — Report of CFSL disclosed that samples did not contain Methaqualone but contained Methamphetamine and ketamine which were also psychotropic substances — Said report cannot come to rescue of prosecution to hold that the proceedings were maintainable — Proceedings liable to be quashed. (Paras39to48)