A preliminary urine test without FSL confirmation was insufficient to sustain NDPS consumption proceedings.

The petitioners, Accused Nos. 1 and 2, were allegedly found behaving abnormally near the Seabird Tourist Bus Office in Gokarna on 21 December 2025.

After they were taken to a Primary Health Centre, their urine samples reportedly tested positive for ganja, and police registered a case under Section 27(b) of the NDPS Act

The petitioners sought to quash the proceedings in C.C. No. 49/2026, contending that the doctor’s certificates were the only material against them.

The State opposed the petitions, relying on the urine-test results

Whether the material on record was sufficient to disclose the ingredients of the alleged offence under Section 27(b) of the NDPS Act

Whether the proceedings against the petitioners should be quashed in the absence of a Forensic Science Laboratory report

Section 27(b) of the NDPS Act prescribes punishment for consumption of a narcotic drug or psychotropic substance other than those specified under clause (a).

The Court considered its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., corresponding to Section 528 of the BNSS, to assess whether the material disclosed the alleged offence and whether continuing the proceedings would amount to an abuse of process.

No precedent was cited.

The allegation of ganja consumption rested primarily on the urine test conducted at the Primary Health Centre.

The samples had not been sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory, and no FSL report was on record.

On that record, the Court held that consumption was not conclusively established and that the material did not disclose the necessary ingredients of the alleged offence.

It therefore found continuation of the proceedings futile and an abuse of process.

Pending applications, if any, were disposed of as not surviving for consideration.