Tweet
Drug peddlers in jail sans trial: SC wants remedial steps soon
The case of drug peddlers locked in prison for years together without a trial led the Supreme Court on Tuesday to direct the Centre and its agencies investigating such crimes to submit remedial steps to ease the bottlenecks.
Citing this to be a gross instance of violation of human rights, the Bench of Justices DK Jain and JS Khehar asked the Narcotics Control Bureau to hold consultation with senior officials of Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Customs and Excise, and Central Bureau of Narcotics and submit a common set of recommendations to remedy this ill by December 3. The court may lay down guidelines in this regard on December 4.
The Director General of NCB, who was present in court, blamed lack of special courts to try cases under the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, 1985. On an average, NCB handled 175 cases every year of which 169 cases were pending for over five years, said Ajay Chadha holding charge of NCB. The case at hand too involved a man arrested with 32 kg of heroin awaiting trial to begin for past 14 years.
Amicus curiae Anitha Shenoy further informed the Court that West Bengal had 31 cases pending without trial for over five years due to one NDPS court in the entire State. The situation was grave in Uttar Pradesh which had 25 NDPS courts of which none functioned. As a result, there were more than 63 cases pending trial for over five years.
The Bench said, “If a person has already spent 6-7 years in jail for an offence meriting similar punishment, what is the justice we are rendering. This cannot be permitted as it’s a serious violation of human rights.” This raised doubts on the efficacy of NDPS Act, it added.
NCB further told court that most officers investigating the offences were on deputation and securing their presence in trial was a challenge. In some cases, judges got transferred and cases had to be re-heard.
District Judge of Saket district courts who too was present in court complained about the large number of witnesses, frequent adjournments on account of non-availability of lawyer and prosecutor, and the nuisance created by accused to demand re-testing of drug sample after several years, which delays proceedings.
The case of drug peddlers locked in prison for years together without a trial led the Supreme Court on Tuesday to direct the Centre and its agencies investigating such crimes to submit remedial steps to ease the bottlenecks.
Citing this to be a gross instance of violation of human rights, the Bench of Justices DK Jain and JS Khehar asked the Narcotics Control Bureau to hold consultation with senior officials of Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Customs and Excise, and Central Bureau of Narcotics and submit a common set of recommendations to remedy this ill by December 3. The court may lay down guidelines in this regard on December 4.
The Director General of NCB, who was present in court, blamed lack of special courts to try cases under the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, 1985. On an average, NCB handled 175 cases every year of which 169 cases were pending for over five years, said Ajay Chadha holding charge of NCB. The case at hand too involved a man arrested with 32 kg of heroin awaiting trial to begin for past 14 years.
Amicus curiae Anitha Shenoy further informed the Court that West Bengal had 31 cases pending without trial for over five years due to one NDPS court in the entire State. The situation was grave in Uttar Pradesh which had 25 NDPS courts of which none functioned. As a result, there were more than 63 cases pending trial for over five years.
The Bench said, “If a person has already spent 6-7 years in jail for an offence meriting similar punishment, what is the justice we are rendering. This cannot be permitted as it’s a serious violation of human rights.” This raised doubts on the efficacy of NDPS Act, it added.
NCB further told court that most officers investigating the offences were on deputation and securing their presence in trial was a challenge. In some cases, judges got transferred and cases had to be re-heard.
District Judge of Saket district courts who too was present in court complained about the large number of witnesses, frequent adjournments on account of non-availability of lawyer and prosecutor, and the nuisance created by accused to demand re-testing of drug sample after several years, which delays proceedings.
