Jharkhand High Court Orders ₹8 Lakh Compensation To Man Falsely Accused In NDPS Case, Jailed For 8 Yrs

The Jharkhand High Court has directed the Additional Director General of the Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB), Sub Zone, Ranchi to pay a compensation of Rs. 8 lakhs to a man who was falsely implicated in a NDPS (Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances) and remained in jail custody for about 8 years for a crime which he did not commit.Justice Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi observed, “In view of above and considering that it is an admitted position that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the case and case for withdrawal has also been filed under section 321 of the Cr.P.C. by none other than the N.C.B. which was rejected that is the subject matter in criminal revision before the co-ordinate Bench of this Court, the entire criminal proceeding arising out of F.I.R. N.C.B. Crime No.04/2015 (02-2015/16), corresponding to NDPS Special Case No.17/2015(N), pending in the court of learned A.J.C.-I, Ranchi including the impugned order dated 01.04.2016 are quashed” “He has remained in jail custody for about eight years for a crime which he has not committed. In view of the above position of law, the petitioner shall be entitled for a sum of Rs.8 lacs(Eight Lacs) as compensation and the same shall be paid to the petitioner through the Additional Director General of the Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB), Sub Zone, Ranchi within eight weeks from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order,” Justice Dwivedi added while directing the petitioner to released forthwith and the necessary formalities to be made by the authority concerned without any delay.The case revolved around the quashing of an FIR linked to an NDPS Special Case registered under sections 8/18(b) of the NDPS Act, 1985, in the court of AJC-I, Ranchi. The petitioner sought the quashing of the charges against him, his release, and compensation of Rs. Fifty Lakhs.As per the factual matrix of the case, in October 2015, around evening time, approximately 10 individuals, some of whom were dressed in police uniforms, arrived at the "Patiala Dhaba" in Barachatti, Gaya, where the petitioner worked as a waiter and cleaner. They forcibly restrained the petitioner, placed handcuffs on them, and made them sit in their vehicle. Later, they revealed themselves as NCB officials.Subsequently, these NCB officials visited Parmanand Vishwakarma, the owner of the land where the Dhaba was located. They forcefully confiscated his vehicle and personal belongings, with the apparent intention of implicating him falsely in a drug-related offense.These NCB officials then transported both the petitioner and the Dhaba owner, Tajendra Singh, to Ranchi. There, they demanded Rs. 10 lakhs from the petitioner for their release, which the petitioner, belonging to a financially disadvantaged family, was unable to pay. In response, the NCB officials demanded Rs. 15 lakhs from Tajendra Singh, who then contacted his family and arranged the requested sum for the NCB officials. Consequently, Tajendra Singh was not implicated as an accused in the ongoing case.The counsel representing the petitioner asserted that both the petitioner and an individual named Parmanand Vishwakarma had been unjustly ensnared in a case that had been filed as a NCB crime. It was contended that the petitioner had been in custody since October 7, 2015, in a case where no evidence had emerged against them. Furthermore, it was highlighted that the petitioner had been falsely implicated based on an erroneous seizure list by the NCB, leading to two unsuccessful attempts by the NCB to withdraw the prosecution against the petitioner and other innocent individuals under section 321 Cr.P.C, as rejected by the trial court.Additionally, it was emphasized that the NCB in Ranchi had pursued a revision petition challenging the trial court's orders dated April 11, 2022, which sought the quashing of the two aforementioned orders passed by the Special Judge, NDPS. The counsel pointed out that the co-accused, Parmanand Vishwakarma, had sought regular bail in the same case and was granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench, further underscoring the perceived falsity of the charges.Anil Kumar, the ASGI representing the NCB (UOI), acknowledged the erroneous nature of the case, and admitted that both the petitioner and another accused had been wrongly implicated, which had prompted the NCB to file withdrawal petitions that were subsequently rejected, which led to ongoing proceedings and directives to initiate departmental actions against the NCB officials responsible for the wrongful implications, including the filing of an FIR and the granting of sanctions for further action.In view of the facts and the submissions of the counsels appearing on behalf of the parties, the Court opined that the petitioner was falsely accused in the instant case which was found to be false by none other than the agency which has implicated the petitioner. The Court while citing specific orders from October 22, 2020, and April 11, 2022, where the facts had been...

Jharkhand High Court Orders ₹8 Lakh Compensation To Man Falsely Accused In NDPS Case, Jailed For 8 Yrs

Bhavya Singh

Tags