In Sensitive Matter Of Narcotics, Manner Of Prosecution Atrocious: Supreme Court Calls For Explanation From NCB Headquarters

"We would also like to know what steps are being taken to streamline the process", said the bench headed by Justice S. K. Kaul.

The bench was hearing, inter alia, the Centre's challenge to the December, 2018 judgment of the Rajasthan High Court acquitting the respondent Ajijur Rahman who was convicted under sections 8/22 (C) and Section 8/21 (B) of NDPS Act and sentenced to 10 years of rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs.1 lac.

"We find that in a sensitive matter relating to narcotics the manner in which the present proceedings are sought to be prosecuted is atrocious. The Special Leave Petitions have been filed after a delay of 652 days", said the bench, also comprising Justice Hrishikesh Roy.

The court proceeded to point out the infirmities in the explanation advanced by the NCB- "The explanation given is at page 474 onwards. The glaring gaps which are apparent are as under..."

The bench indicated that (a) the opinion of the SPP was given after six months to the Department on 16.05.2019.

" We call for an explanation from the NCB headquarters as to how the aforesaid has transpired and what responsibility has been fixed on which officer for such negligence. We would also like to know what steps are being taken to streamline the process. The affidavit will be filed under the signatures of the Director General, NCB. The affidavit be filed within four week", ordered the bench.

The High court, in the impugned judgment, had remarked that the Narcotic Control Bureau is constituted for controlling drug trafficking and the Officers posted therein are presumed to know the law and to apply the law strictly.

The division bech of the High Court had pointed out several infirmities in the NCB's investigation- "Sending intimation of arrest to relative of the accused and preparing the arrest memo thereafter with the purpose of showing that the statements under Section 67 of the NDPS Act were recorded prior to arrest, preparing of office order mentioning therein that Ajijur Rehman has given statement with regard to selling of heroin to Roop Kumar and his associates is not tallying with the statements of Ajijur Rehman. Fact of selling heroin to Roop Kumar appears for the first time in the statements recorded between 7.30 a.m. to 12.30 p.m. when Ajijur Rehman was in custody on 13.7.2003 constituting a team between 00.00 to 00.15 a.m. on 13.7.2003 is thus based on factually incorrect ground, the fact that statement of Ajijur Rehman was recorded while he was in custody as is evident from the intimation sent to his wife after his arrest, fact that the samples remained with the Seizure Officer for three days, fact that there was reduction and increase in weight of samples within few days of the seizure, fact that the seals were not deposited in Malkhana, all pin point to the faulty investigation conducted by NCB. In addition there is non-compliance of provisions of of NDPS Act, in totality, prosecution has not been able to prove the offence beyond reasonable doubt", the High Court had observed in quashing nd setting aside the judgment of the court below and directing that Rahman be released from custody forthwith.