The NDPS Act lays down a statutory & mandatory procedure for the search & seizure of the narcotics & psychotropic substances--for example, the option to be searched in the presence of a Gazetted Officer, the presence of Panchas at the time of the recovery of the said drugs, etc.
However, none of the drugs—examined by the CFSL, were seized as per the aforesaid procedure. Hence, the said samples—irrespective of their quantity, have no evidentiary value at all against Rahul.
Moreover, till date the only evidence against Rahul is the presence of certain drugs in his blood, vomit, stomach-wash, etc. Does that necessarily prove that he voluntarily consumed the said drugs or that simply that these reached his stomach—may be voluntarily, may be by deceit, may be by design?
Hence, the essential ingredients of the offence--with which he has been charged in the said FIR, are absent. Therefore, the FIR is liable to be quashed u/s 482 of the Cr.P.C.
P.S.: The analysis presented in this Article is purely legal--it has no moral ramifications.
Morally speaking, it must be stated that Rahul suffered for nine days because he did breach the religious requirement for the Hindus, viz. mourning until the 'tehrvin' (13th day after the death) or, at least, till the 'asthi' (last remains) of his father were immersed in a holy river like 'Ganga' (the Ganges). But he had a champagne-party while his father's 'asthi' were awaiting immersion. And because of what happened thereafter, the immersion had to be carried out by someone other than the eldest son. Rahul, being the eldest son, was required to immerse his father’s last remains.