Bombay High Court
Siraj Fakir Mohammad QureshiversusAnti Narcotic Cell, Ghatkopar Unit
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
- Bench
- SHIVKUMAR DIGE
Holding
The revision application is dismissed as infructuous, with no merits decided.
Summary
Siraj Fakir Mohammad Qureshi filed a criminal revision seeking to challenge the trial court's order rejecting his discharge under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. While the revision was pending, the court framed charges against him and he filed a separate application contesting the framing of those charges. The learned counsel argued that the revision had become moot. The High Court held that the revision application was infructuous in view of the subsequent framing of charges and the pending challenge, and therefore dismissed it without deciding the merits. The order expressly states that no substantive issue was decided.
Issues considered
- Whether a revision application challenging the rejection of a discharge order under the NDPS Act remains maintainable after charges are framed against the applicant.
- Whether the existence of a pending application challenging the framing of charge renders the revision application infructuous.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- revision
- criminal procedure
- NDPS Act
- discharge order
- framing of charge
- infructuous application
Judgment
123-REVN-379-2025 (CR).doc
S.S.Kilaje
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 379 OF 2025
Siraj Fakir Mohammad Qureshi … Applicant
Versus
State of Maharashtra … Respondent
_________________________________________________________________
Ms. Puja Yadav i/b. Mr. Shreerat Kamath, Advocate for the Applicant.
Digitally signed
by SONALI
SONALI SATISH
KILAJE
SATISH Date:
KILAJE 2026.01.31
Smt. Ranjana D. Humane, APP for the Respondent-State.
17:04:50
+0700
_________________________________________________________________
CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.
DATE : 28th JANUARY, 2026.
P.C. :
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned APP for the
State.
2. Learned counsel for the Revision Applicant submits that by this
application, applicant has challenged the order rejecting the order of
discharge by order under the provisions of The Narcotic Drugs and
Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 ("NDPS Act"). But during the pendency
of this application, charges have been framed against the applicant and
applicant has preferred separate application challenging the framing of
charge. The said application is under scrutiny.
3. Considering the submission of learned counsel for the Revision
Applicant, this Revision Application has become infructuous. Dismissed
Page 1 of 2
123-REVN-379-2025 (CR).doc
S.S.Kilaje
and disposed of. I make it clear, this application has not decided on
merit.
(SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)
Page 2 of 2
Checking your session…