Case Title:
Kalu Sk. @ Kuran Vs. State
Date of Order:
22/06/2022
Bench:
Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay
Parties:
Kalu Sk. – Petitioner
The State–Respondent
Subject
In the light of decreasing transparency of the police authorities granted plenary powers under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, the court has ruled that in all cases pertaining to the recovery of narcotic contraband, a video recording of the seizing operation should be produced before the court and issued various other directives.
Relevant Provisions
- The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act passed in 1985 bans anyone from producing, distributing, or consuming any of the substances listed under the act.
Facts
- In the instant case, which was regarding a narcotics raid by the personnel powered under the NDPS Act, the court noted the absence of a few accused whose signature was not on the list of all the people claimed to have been taken into custody on site.
- Also, the presence of an independent witness at the recovery site was also dubious, as the witness did not help the case of the recovery officers in their statement in front of the magistrate.
- Sizing up the situation, the court called upon the Superintendent of Police of Murshidabad District to look into the matter and ensure a detailed inquiry and suspension orders are awarded to those involved in this matter.
- The signatures were obtained, and the seizing officers, police station in-charge and the officer-in-charge of the raid were suspended with departmental proceedings initiated against them.
Judgment
- The court noted that although the unrestricted powers granted to the investigating officers under the NDPS Act are necessary for securing our future generations from falling into the vicious cycle of drug abuse, it pointed out that its absolute powers are sometimes used disproportionately by the officers leading to severe damage on an innocent person over a prolonged period of time.
- Judgment of Shafhi Mohammad v. State of Himachal Pradesh was cited by the court to place reliance on the suggestions of a Committee of Experts formed by the Ministry of Home Affairs in 2017, which proposed mandatory videography of the crime scene to induce transparency in the process and bolster the spirit of the Rule of Law.
- It was originally upheld in thecase of Shafhi Mohammad v. State of Himachal Pradeshby the apex court.
- Backed by the above case and the Narcotics Control Bureau issued Field Officer’s Handbook, the court deemed that it is about time the mandatory recording of the seize be enforced as smartphones with cameras becoming commonplace, and there is no lack of technology or expertise to use that technology.
- The Hon’ble’ court issued the following directives: -
- All types of cases pertaining to the recovery of narcotic substances shall be video recorded with the exception of situations that the officers cannot control.
- Such ‘exceptional’ situations need to be specified in the investigation records as reasons why there is no video recording of the raid.
- An officer of at least the rank of Additional Superintendent of Police will oversee the operation ensuring compliance with the directives.
- Superintendent/Commissioner of Police will conduct a training program to ensure awareness among the police force regarding the above directives.
Conclusion
In the present case, the Superintendent of Police of Murshidabad was called upon to take action on the officers involved in the investigation and obtain signatures of all the accused taken into custody. The orders were followed up and the officers responsible were put under suspension and departmental proceedings were initiated.
Learn the practical aspects of CrPC HERE, CPC HERE, IPC HERE, Evidence Act HERE, Family Laws HERE, DV Act HERE
Click here to download the original copy of the judgement
