NDPS case quashed after private hospital’s urine drug screen lacked confirmatory testing

The petitioner sought to quash the charge sheet in Spl. C. No. 741/2024, pending before the VIII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural.

The charge sheet relied on a urine-test report issued by respondent Santosh Hospital, a private hospital.

The Court noted that the charge sheet contained the hospital’s report, which was only presumptive; no Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) report or confirmatory test was part of the charge sheet.

Whether the charge sheet could be sustained when it relied on a presumptive urine-screening report from Santosh Hospital without confirmatory testing or an FSL report

Exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution read with Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the Court relied on its earlier decision in W.P. No. 4819/2025, which held that urine-test results relied upon in such proceedings require confirmation and that testing at a private laboratory must be supported by proper authorisation or recognition.

These authorities support the principles that screening or field tests are preliminary, that confirmatory analysis—such as chromatography or mass spectrometry—may be necessary, and that a laboratory report may be an essential part of the investigation in proceedings involving alleged narcotic or psychotropic substances.

Applying its earlier decision, the Court found that the prosecution relied on Santosh Hospital’s report, which was only presumptive, while confirmatory tests had not been conducted and an FSL report was absent from the charge sheet.

In light of the cited authorities and the deficiencies identified in the investigation, the Court concluded that the proceedings could not be sustained against the petitioner.