UNION OF INDIA Vs. MOHANLAL & ANR
NARCOTIC DRUGS AND PSYCHOTROPIC SUBSTANCES ACT, 1985 (NDPS)
NARCOTIC DRUGS AND PSYCHOTROPIC SUBSTANCES (AMENDMENT) ACT, 2014
Section 16 - Punishment for contravention in relation to coca plant and coca leaves.
Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)
Appeal (Crl.), 652 of 2012, Judgment Date: Jan 28, 2016
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.652 OF 2012
Union of India …Appellant
Versus
Mohanlal & Anr. …Respondents
JUDGMENT
T.S. THAKUR, J.
1. When this appeal came up for hearing before us on 11th April, 2012,
it was contended by learned counsel for the appellant-Union of India that
Standing Order No.1 of 1989 dated 13th June, 1989 which prescribes the
procedure to be followed for seizure, sampling, safe keeping and disposal
of the seized Drugs, Narcotics and Psychotropic substances is being
followed throughout the country. It was also contended that Ministry of
Finance, Department of Revenue, Government of India, has in terms of a
Circular dated 23rd February, 2011 impressed upon the Chief Secretaries and
the concerned police heads of the State Governments to ensure that
instructions given and the procedure prescribed in the Standing Order
aforementioned was strictly adhered to. These submissions notwithstanding,
doubts about the procedure being actually followed persisted. Pilferage of
the contraband goods and their return to the market place for circulation
being a major hazard, this Court appointed Mr. Ajit Kumar Sinha, Senior
Advocate, as Amicus Curiae, with a view to making a realistic review of the
procedure for search, disposal or destruction of the narcotics and the
remedial steps that need to be taken to plug the loopholes, if any.
2. On 3rd July, 2012 this Court after hearing the Amicus Curiae prima
facie came to the conclusion that the procedure prescribed for the
destruction of the contraband seized in different States was not being
followed resulting in a very piquant situation in which accumulation of
huge quantities of the seized drugs and narcotics has increased manifold
the chances of their pilferage for re-circulation in the market. This Court
also noted a report published in the timesofindia.indiatimes.com under the
heading “Bathinda’s police stores bursting at seams with seized narcotics”
from which it appeared that large quantities of seized drugs had
accumulated over the years including opium, poppy husk, charas etc. apart
from modern narcotic substances. The report suggested that 39 lakhs
sedatives and narcotic tablets, 1.10 lakhs capsules, over 21,000 drug
syrups and 1828 sedative injections apart from 8 kgs. of smack and 84 kgs.
of ganja were awaiting disposal in Bathinda Police stores alone. The
position was, according to Mr. Sinha, no better in other States especially
those situate along the international borders. It was argued by the Amicus
Curiae that without proper data from the authorities concerned, it was not
possible to take stock of the magnitude of the problem no matter challenges
posed by rampant drug abuse had acquired alarming proportions affecting the
youth, some of whom are driven to commission of crimes on account of
deleterious effects of drug abuse.
3. It was in the above backdrop that by an order dated 3rd July, 2012
passed in Criminal Appeal No.652 of 2012 this Court directed collection of
information from the police heads of each one of the States through the
Chief Secretaries concerned in regard to seizure, storage, disposal and
destruction of the seized contraband and judicial supervision over the
same. Specific queries were formulated in the order passed by us with a
direction to the Chief Secretaries of the States concerned to serve the
same upon the Directors General of Police for a report to be forwarded
through the Registrars General of the High Courts of the States concerned
who were appointed Nodal Officers for that purpose. Registrars General were
also asked to independently secure from the District and Sessions Judges
concerned in their respective States, answers to the queries specified
under the head “Judicial Supervision”. Chiefs of Central Government
Agencies viz. Narcotics Control Bureau, Central Bureau of Narcotics,
Directorate General of Revenue Intelligence and Commissionerates of Customs
& Central Excise including the Indian Coast Guard were directed to issue
similar queries to the officers concerned and to submit their respective
reports detailing the information required in terms of the orders passed by
this Court. The queries raised by this Court were in the following words:
“12.1. Seizure
(i) What narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances (natural and synthetic)
have been seized in the last 10 years and in what quantity? Provide
yearwise and districtwise details of the seizure made by the relevant
authority.
(ii) What are the steps, if any, taken by the seizing authorities to
prevent damage, loss and pilferage of the narcotic drugs and psychotropic
substances (natural and synthetic) during seizure/transit?
(iii) What are the circulars/notifications/directions/guidelines, if any,
issued to competent officers to follow any specific procedure in regard to
seizure of contrabands, their storage and destruction? Copies of the same
be attached to the report.
12.2. Storage
(i) Is there any specified/notified store for storage of the seized
contraband in a State, if so, is the storage space available in each
district or taluka?
(ii) If a store/storage space is not available in each district or taluka,
where is the contraband sent for storage purposes? Under what conditions is
withdrawal of the contraband permissible and whether a court order is
obtained for such withdrawal?
(iii) What are the steps taken at the time of storage to determine the
nature and quantity of the substance being stored and what are the measures
taken to prevent substitution and pilferage from the stores?
(iv) Is there any check stock register maintained at the site of storage
and if so, by whom? Is there any periodical check of such register? If so,
by whom? Is any record regarding such periodic inspection maintained and in
what form?
(v) What is the condition of the storage facilities at present? Is there
any shortage of space or any other infrastructure lacking? What steps have
been taken or are being taken to remove the deficiencies, if any?
(vi) Have any circulars/notifications/directions/guidelines been issued to
competent officers for care and caution to be exercised during storage? If
so, a copy of the same be produced.
12.3. Disposal/Destruction
(i) What narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances (natural and synthetic)
have been destroyed in the last 10 years and in what quantity? Provide
yearwise and districtwise details of the destruction made by the relevant
authority. If no destruction has taken place, the reason therefor.
(ii) Who is authorised to apply for permission of the court to destroy the
seized contraband? Has there been any failure or dereliction in making such
applications? Whether any person having technical knowledge of narcotic
drugs and psychotropic substances (natural and synthetic) is associated
with the actual process of destruction of the contraband?
(iii) Was any action taken against the person who should have applied for
permission to destroy the drugs or should have destroyed and did not do so?
(iv) What are the steps taken at the time of destruction to determine the
nature and quantity of the substance being destroyed?
(v) What are the steps taken by competent authorities to prevent damage,
loss, pilferage and tampering/substitution of the narcotic drugs and
psychotropic substances (natural and synthetic) during transit from point
of storage to point of destruction?
(vi) Is there any specified facility for destruction of contraband in the
State? If so, a list of such facilities along with location and details of
maintenance, conditions and supervisory bodies be provided.
(vii) If a facility is not available, where is the contraband sent for
destruction purposes? Under whose supervision and what is the entire
procedure thereof?
(viii) Is any record, electronic or otherwise prepared at the site of
destruction of the contraband and by whom? Is there any periodical check of
such record? What are the ranks/designation of the supervising officers
charged with keeping a check on the same?
12.4. Judicial supervision
(i) Is any inspection done by the District and Sessions Judge of the store
where the seized drugs are kept? If drugs are lying in the store, has the
Sessions Judge taken steps to have them destroyed?
(ii) Is any report of the inspection conducted, submitted to the
Administrative Judge of the High Court or the Registry of the High Court?
If so, has any action on the subject being taken for timely inspection and
destruction of the drugs?
(iii) Are there any pending applications for destruction of drugs in the
district concerned, if so, what is the reason for the delay in the disposal
of such application?
(iv) What level officers including the judicial officers are associated
with the process of destruction?
(v) At what stages are the Magistrates/judicial officers/any other officer
of the court associated with seizure/storage/destruction of drugs?
(vi) Are there any rules framed by the Court regarding its supervisory role
in enforcement of the NDPS Act as regards seizure/storage/destruction of
drugs?
(vii) What is the average time for completion of trial of NDPS matters?”
4. In compliance with the above directions, reports have been submitted
by all the States except the States of Arunachal Pradesh, Jammu and
Kashmir, Dadar & Nagar Haveli, Lakshadweep, Nagaland and Pondicherry. From
a perusal of the reports so received the position that emerges in regard to
disposal/destruction of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substance qua each
State for the last 10 years may be summarised as under:
DETAILS OF SEIZURE AND DISPOSAL OF DRUGS (STATEWISE)
ANDHRA PRADESH
|Item |Total Quantity |Total Quantity |Difference |
| |Seized (In 10 |Destroyed (in 10 | |
| |years) |years) | |
|Ganja |2,20,977.191 Kg |3910.70 Kg |217066.491 kg |
| | | |(98.23%) |
|Opium |22.925 kg |0 |22.925 Kg |
| | | |(100%) |
|Charas |6.5 kg |0 |6.5 kg (100%) |
|Cocaine |851.096 kg |0 |851.096 kg |
| | | |(100%) |
|Others |85.125 kg + 103 |0 | |
| |Capsules + 81 | | |
| |Injections 26 Amp | | |
2. ASSAM
(The Information pertains only to the period of 2010-2012)
|Item |Total Quantity |Total Quantity |Difference |
| |Seized (In 10 |Destroyed (in 10 | |
| |years) |years) | |
|Ganja |203.54 Kg |136 Kg |67.54 (33.18%) |
|Heroin |.614 kg |0 |.214 Kg |
| | | |(34.853%) |
|Opium |30 gms |0 |30 gms (100%)|
|Others |755662 |41472 Nos. |714190 Nos. |
| | | |(94.5%) |
3. BIHAR
|Item |Total Quantity |Total Quantity |Difference |
| |Seized (In 10 |Destroyed (in 10 | |
| |years) |years) | |
|Ganja |45 Kg |0 |45 kg |
|Heroin |3.74 kg |0 |3.74 kg |
|Charas |48.853 kg |0 |48.853 kg |
|Poppy |100 kgs |0 |100 kgs |
|Straws | | | |
|Methqualon|1676 kgs |0 |1676 kgs |
|e | | | |
Note:- No destruction of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances have
taken place at Patna zonal unit.
4. CHHATTISGARH
|Item |Total Quantity |Total Quantity |Difference |
| |Seized (In 10 |Destroyed (in 10 | |
| |years) |years) | |
|Ganja |1,03,622.140 kg |3281.570 kg |1,00,340.57 |
| |Kg | |(96.77%) |
|Cannabis |52478 (Nos) |380 (Nos) |52098 (Nos) |
|Plants | | |(92.7%) |
|Brown Sugar |3.120 kg |0 |3.129 kg (100%)|
|Opium |1.460 kg |0 |1.460 kg (100%)|
|Opium Poppy |1558 pieces |0 |1558 pieces |
|Plant | | |(100%) |
|Green Opium |3600 kg |0 |3600 kg (100%) |
|Plant | | | |
5. CUSTOMS AND CENTRAL EXCISE
|Item |Total Quantity |Total Quantity |Difference |
| |Seized (In 10 |Destroyed (in 10 | |
| |years) |years) | |
|Opium |367.007 kg |658.525 kg |Destroyed more |
| | | |than seized |
|Morphine |58.393 kg |190 kg + 88930 Pcs |58.203 kg |
| | |Injections |(99.6%) |
|Heroine |1658.099 kg |739.687 kg |918.412 kg |
| | | |(55.3%) |
|Ganja |484124.056 kg |8,43,008.559 kg |Destroyed more |
| | | |than seized |
|Hashish |77350.076 kg |12298.578 kg |Destroyed more |
| | | |than seized |
|Cocaine |640.569 kg |0 |640.569 kg |
| | | |(100%) |
6. CHANDIGARH
|Item |Total Quantity |Total Quantity |Difference |
| |Seized (In 10 |Destroyed (in 10 | |
| |years) |years) | |
|Contraband |By relevant |900.179 Kgs |2305.444 Kgs |
| |authorities | |(71%) |
| |3205.623 Kgs | | |
|Morphine |58.393 kg |190kg + 88930 Pcs |58.203 kg |
| | |Injections |(99.6%) |
|Heroine |1658.099 kg |739.687 kg |918.412 kg |
| | | |(55.3%) |
|Ganja |484124.056 kg |8,43,008.559 kg |Destroyed more |
| | | |than seized |
|Hashish |77350.076 kg |12298.578 kg |Destroyed more |
| | | |than seized |
|Cocaine |640.569 kg |0 |640.569 kg |
| | | |(100%) |
7. DELHI
Delhi has provided two responses. One response has been provided by the
NCB, Delhi and the other by the police heads of each of the district.
The response by NCB, Delhi is as follows :-
|Item |Total Quantity |Total Quantity |Difference |
| |Seized (In 10 |Destroyed (in 10 | |
| |years) |years) | |
|Contraband |8891.8373 |680.376 kg |8211.4613 kg |
| | | |(92.34%) |
The Response by the police heads are as follows:-
|Item |Total Quantity |Total Quantity |Difference |
| |Seized (In 10 |Destroyed (in 10 | |
| |years) |years) | |
| |By relevant | | |
| |authorities | | |
|Contraband |52944.577 kg |32443.456 kg |20500.601 |
|(Hashish, | | |(38.72%) |
|Cocaine, | | | |
|Ganja, | | | |
|Heroin | | | |
|etc.) | | | |
|Contrabands|1020669 |0 |1020669 (100%)|
|(Chemical | | | |
|Substances | | | |
|in Tablets,| | | |
|Injections)| | | |
8. DAMAN AND DIU
The UT Daman and Diu has informed the Total quantity by way of a detailed
chart:
|Item |Total Quantity |Total Quantity |Difference |
| |Seized (In 10 |Destroyed (in 10 | |
| |years) |years) | |
| |By relevant | | |
| |authorities | | |
|Contraband |25.827 kgs |000 kgs |25.827 Kgs |
| | | |(100%) |
9. DIRECTORATE OF REVENUE INTELLIGENCE
|Item |Total Quantity |Total Quantity |Difference |
| |Seized (In 10 |Destroyed (in 10 | |
| |years) |years) | |
| |By relevant | | |
| |authorities | | |
|Contraband |174185.687 kg |2859.448 Kg |171326.239 |
| | | |(98.3%) |
10. GUJARAT
The Response of the state is divided into two parts.
One has been provided by the office of the Ministry of Home Affairs.
As per the said response the total amount of contraband seized in 10 years
are 28340.047 Kg. No division of the type has been provided.
The total destruction in the last 10 years however is only 132.375 Kg
The total amount of Contraband still in custody of the authorities is
28207.672 Kgs, i.e. 99.53% of the seized amount.
The response of the NCB Zonal Unit is as follows:
|Item |Total Quantity |Total Quantity |Difference |
| |Seized (In 10 |Destroyed (in 10 | |
| |years) |years) | |
|Charas |1421.14 kg |15.056 kgs |1406.084 kg |
| | | |(98.9%) |
|Opium |17.505 kg |0 |17.505 kg |
| | | |(100%) |
|Brown Sugar|2.03 kg |0 |2.03 kg (100%)|
|Heroin |3.066 kg |0 (981 gms of Heroin|3.066 kg |
| | |was destroyed in |(100%) |
| | |2000, however all | |
| | |the seizures have | |
| | |been made post 2003)| |
|Others |3766.126 kg + 299|525 kgs |3241.126 kgs |
| |ltrs. + 1022 | |(86.05%) + 229|
| |Tablets | |ltrs (100%) + |
| | | |1022 Tablets |
| | | |(100%) |
11. GOA
The UT Chandigarh has informed the Total quantity by way of a
detailed chart:
|Item |Total Quantity |Total Quantity |Difference |
| |Seized (In 10 |Destroyed (in 10 | |
| |years) |years) | |
| |By relevant | | |
| |authorities | | |
|Contraband |548.746 kgs. |000 kgs |548.7476 kgs |
| | | |(100%) |
12. HARYANA
|Item |Total Quantity |Total Quantity |Difference |
| |Seized (In 10 |Destroyed (in 10 | |
| |years) |years) | |
|Ganja |2604.077 kg |521.133 kg |2082.944 kg |
| | | |(79%) |
|Charas |7252.513 kg |533.46 kg |6719.053 kg |
| | | |(92.64%) |
|Opium |1086.387 kg |1972.860 |Destroyed more|
| | | |than seized |
|Smack |8200.00 kg |4169.919 kg |4030.081 kg |
| | | |(49.14%) |
|Heroine |1.046 kg |1.300 kg |Destroyed more|
| | | |than seized |
|Brown Sugar|2.001 kg |1.003 kg |998 kg |
| | | |(49.87%) |
|Cocaine |.325 kg |0 |.325 kg (100%)|
13. HIMACHAL PRADESH
The State of Himachal Pradesh has informed the Total quantity by way of a
detailed chart:
|Item |Total Quantity |Total Quantity |Difference |
| |Seized (In 10 |Destroyed (in 10 | |
| |years) |years) | |
|Contraband |17026.714 |1856.913 |15169.801 |
| | | |(89.09%) |
14. JHARKHAND
|Item |Total Quantity |Total Quantity |Difference |
| |Seized (In 10 |Destroyed (in 10 | |
| |years) |years) | |
|Ganja |1793.381 kg |0 (area of |1793.381 kg |
| | |cultivation has been|(100%) |
| | |destroyed) | |
|Opium |360.59 kg |0 |360.59 kg |
| | | |(100%) |
|Brown Sugar|1.576 kg |0 |1.576 kg |
| | | |(100%) |
|Heroine |546 kg |0 |546 kg (100%) |
15. KERALA
|Item |Total Quantity |Total Quantity |Difference |
| |Seized (In 10 |Destroyed (in 10 | |
| |years) |years) | |
|Ganja |7588.543 Kg |2740.926 kg |4847.617 kg |
| | | |(63.88%) |
|Heroine |.536 kg |0 |.536 kg (100%)|
|Hashish |12.368 kg |0 |12.368 (100%) |
|Charas |.063 kg |0 |.063 kg (100%)|
|Brown Sugar|8.432 kg |12.058 kg |Destroyed more|
| | | |than seized |
|Opium |23.697 kg |0 |23.697 kg |
| | | |(100%) |
16. KARNATAKA
The state of Karnataka divided its response in two parts. One is seizure
by Police and the Other is seizure by NCB
|Item |Total Quantity |Total Quantity |Difference |
| |Seized (In 10 |Destroyed (in 10 | |
| |years) |years) | |
|Contraband |By NCB | | |
| | | | |
| | |000 kgs |366.838 Kgs |
| |366.838 Kgs | |(100%) |
| | |12140.592 | |
| | | |15151.041 |
| |By relevant | |(55%) |
| |authorities | | |
| |27291.633 Kgs | | |
17. MAHARASHTRA
|Item |Total Quantity |Total Quantity |Difference |
| |Seized (In 10 |Destroyed (in 10 | |
| |years) |years) | |
|Ganja |1,14,082 kg |8750 kg |1,14,074 kg |
| | | |(92.33%) |
|Heroin |654 kg |228 kg |426 kg |
| | | |(65.13%) |
|Charas |2364.90 kg |471.735 |1893.165 |
| | | |(80.05%) |
|Opium |613.044 kg |47.135 kg |565.909 kg |
| | | |(92.31%) |
|Cocaine |11.049 kg |0 kg |11.049 kg |
| | | |(100%) |
18. MANIPUR
|Item |Total Quantity |Total Quantity |Difference |
| |Seized (In 10 |Destroyed (in 10 | |
| |years) |years) | |
|Heroin |37.534 kg. |12.498 kg |25.036 kg |
| | | |(66.072%) |
|Ganja |45343.25 kg |41963.389 kg |3379.861 kg |
| | |(Kindly refer to the|(7.45%) |
| | |Note) | |
|Opium |233.985 kg |0 |233.985 kg |
| | | |(100%) |
|Hashish |3.05 kg |0 |3.05 kg (100%)|
Note: The Total amount of Ganja seized post 2005 was 25913.225 kgs and the
same is still lying with the authorities since the last pretrial disposal
in 2005.
19. MADHYA PRADESH
Madhya Pradesh has divided its response in two parts. One is seizure by
Police and the other is seizure by NCB.
|Item |Total Quantity |Total Quantity |Difference |
| |Seized (In 10 |Destroyed (in 10 |In Kgs |
| |years) |years) | |
| |In Kgs |In Kgs | |
|Contraband |By Police- |By Police |By Police |
| |804376.528 |61384.805 |-742991.723 |
| | | |Kgs (92%) |
| | | | |
| |BY NCB | |Destroyed more|
| |348 kg | |than seized |
20. Ministry of Home Affairs NCB
|Item |Total Quantity |Total Quantity |Difference |
| |Seized (In 10 |Destroyed (in 10 | |
| |years) |years) | |
|Contraband |By relevant | | |
| |authorities | | |
| | |4476.482 kgs | |
| |5344.12 Kgs. | |867.638 (16%) |
21. ORISSA
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.652 OF 2012
Union of India …Appellant
Versus
Mohanlal & Anr. …Respondents
JUDGMENT
T.S. THAKUR, J.
1. When this appeal came up for hearing before us on 11th April, 2012,
it was contended by learned counsel for the appellant-Union of India that
Standing Order No.1 of 1989 dated 13th June, 1989 which prescribes the
procedure to be followed for seizure, sampling, safe keeping and disposal
of the seized Drugs, Narcotics and Psychotropic substances is being
followed throughout the country. It was also contended that Ministry of
Finance, Department of Revenue, Government of India, has in terms of a
Circular dated 23rd February, 2011 impressed upon the Chief Secretaries and
the concerned police heads of the State Governments to ensure that
instructions given and the procedure prescribed in the Standing Order
aforementioned was strictly adhered to. These submissions notwithstanding,
doubts about the procedure being actually followed persisted. Pilferage of
the contraband goods and their return to the market place for circulation
being a major hazard, this Court appointed Mr. Ajit Kumar Sinha, Senior
Advocate, as Amicus Curiae, with a view to making a realistic review of the
procedure for search, disposal or destruction of the narcotics and the
remedial steps that need to be taken to plug the loopholes, if any.
2. On 3rd July, 2012 this Court after hearing the Amicus Curiae prima
facie came to the conclusion that the procedure prescribed for the
destruction of the contraband seized in different States was not being
followed resulting in a very piquant situation in which accumulation of
huge quantities of the seized drugs and narcotics has increased manifold
the chances of their pilferage for re-circulation in the market. This Court
also noted a report published in the timesofindia.indiatimes.com under the
heading “Bathinda’s police stores bursting at seams with seized narcotics”
from which it appeared that large quantities of seized drugs had
accumulated over the years including opium, poppy husk, charas etc. apart
from modern narcotic substances. The report suggested that 39 lakhs
sedatives and narcotic tablets, 1.10 lakhs capsules, over 21,000 drug
syrups and 1828 sedative injections apart from 8 kgs. of smack and 84 kgs.
of ganja were awaiting disposal in Bathinda Police stores alone. The
position was, according to Mr. Sinha, no better in other States especially
those situate along the international borders. It was argued by the Amicus
Curiae that without proper data from the authorities concerned, it was not
possible to take stock of the magnitude of the problem no matter challenges
posed by rampant drug abuse had acquired alarming proportions affecting the
youth, some of whom are driven to commission of crimes on account of
deleterious effects of drug abuse.
3. It was in the above backdrop that by an order dated 3rd July, 2012
passed in Criminal Appeal No.652 of 2012 this Court directed collection of
information from the police heads of each one of the States through the
Chief Secretaries concerned in regard to seizure, storage, disposal and
destruction of the seized contraband and judicial supervision over the
same. Specific queries were formulated in the order passed by us with a
direction to the Chief Secretaries of the States concerned to serve the
same upon the Directors General of Police for a report to be forwarded
through the Registrars General of the High Courts of the States concerned
who were appointed Nodal Officers for that purpose. Registrars General were
also asked to independently secure from the District and Sessions Judges
concerned in their respective States, answers to the queries specified
under the head “Judicial Supervision”. Chiefs of Central Government
Agencies viz. Narcotics Control Bureau, Central Bureau of Narcotics,
Directorate General of Revenue Intelligence and Commissionerates of Customs
& Central Excise including the Indian Coast Guard were directed to issue
similar queries to the officers concerned and to submit their respective
reports detailing the information required in terms of the orders passed by
this Court. The queries raised by this Court were in the following words:
“12.1. Seizure
(i) What narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances (natural and synthetic)
have been seized in the last 10 years and in what quantity? Provide
yearwise and districtwise details of the seizure made by the relevant
authority.
(ii) What are the steps, if any, taken by the seizing authorities to
prevent damage, loss and pilferage of the narcotic drugs and psychotropic
substances (natural and synthetic) during seizure/transit?
(iii) What are the circulars/notifications/directions/guidelines, if any,
issued to competent officers to follow any specific procedure in regard to
seizure of contrabands, their storage and destruction? Copies of the same
be attached to the report.
12.2. Storage
(i) Is there any specified/notified store for storage of the seized
contraband in a State, if so, is the storage space available in each
district or taluka?
(ii) If a store/storage space is not available in each district or taluka,
where is the contraband sent for storage purposes? Under what conditions is
withdrawal of the contraband permissible and whether a court order is
obtained for such withdrawal?
(iii) What are the steps taken at the time of storage to determine the
nature and quantity of the substance being stored and what are the measures
taken to prevent substitution and pilferage from the stores?
(iv) Is there any check stock register maintained at the site of storage
and if so, by whom? Is there any periodical check of such register? If so,
by whom? Is any record regarding such periodic inspection maintained and in
what form?
(v) What is the condition of the storage facilities at present? Is there
any shortage of space or any other infrastructure lacking? What steps have
been taken or are being taken to remove the deficiencies, if any?
(vi) Have any circulars/notifications/directions/guidelines been issued to
competent officers for care and caution to be exercised during storage? If
so, a copy of the same be produced.
12.3. Disposal/Destruction
(i) What narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances (natural and synthetic)
have been destroyed in the last 10 years and in what quantity? Provide
yearwise and districtwise details of the destruction made by the relevant
authority. If no destruction has taken place, the reason therefor.
(ii) Who is authorised to apply for permission of the court to destroy the
seized contraband? Has there been any failure or dereliction in making such
applications? Whether any person having technical knowledge of narcotic
drugs and psychotropic substances (natural and synthetic) is associated
with the actual process of destruction of the contraband?
(iii) Was any action taken against the person who should have applied for
permission to destroy the drugs or should have destroyed and did not do so?
(iv) What are the steps taken at the time of destruction to determine the
nature and quantity of the substance being destroyed?
(v) What are the steps taken by competent authorities to prevent damage,
loss, pilferage and tampering/substitution of the narcotic drugs and
psychotropic substances (natural and synthetic) during transit from point
of storage to point of destruction?
(vi) Is there any specified facility for destruction of contraband in the
State? If so, a list of such facilities along with location and details of
maintenance, conditions and supervisory bodies be provided.
(vii) If a facility is not available, where is the contraband sent for
destruction purposes? Under whose supervision and what is the entire
procedure thereof?
(viii) Is any record, electronic or otherwise prepared at the site of
destruction of the contraband and by whom? Is there any periodical check of
such record? What are the ranks/designation of the supervising officers
charged with keeping a check on the same?
12.4. Judicial supervision
(i) Is any inspection done by the District and Sessions Judge of the store
where the seized drugs are kept? If drugs are lying in the store, has the
Sessions Judge taken steps to have them destroyed?
(ii) Is any report of the inspection conducted, submitted to the
Administrative Judge of the High Court or the Registry of the High Court?
If so, has any action on the subject being taken for timely inspection and
destruction of the drugs?
(iii) Are there any pending applications for destruction of drugs in the
district concerned, if so, what is the reason for the delay in the disposal
of such application?
(iv) What level officers including the judicial officers are associated
with the process of destruction?
(v) At what stages are the Magistrates/judicial officers/any other officer
of the court associated with seizure/storage/destruction of drugs?
(vi) Are there any rules framed by the Court regarding its supervisory role
in enforcement of the NDPS Act as regards seizure/storage/destruction of
drugs?
(vii) What is the average time for completion of trial of NDPS matters?”
4. In compliance with the above directions, reports have been submitted
by all the States except the States of Arunachal Pradesh, Jammu and
Kashmir, Dadar & Nagar Haveli, Lakshadweep, Nagaland and Pondicherry. From
a perusal of the reports so received the position that emerges in regard to
disposal/destruction of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substance qua each
State for the last 10 years may be summarised as under:
DETAILS OF SEIZURE AND DISPOSAL OF DRUGS (STATEWISE)
ANDHRA PRADESH
|Item |Total Quantity |Total Quantity |Difference |
| |Seized (In 10 |Destroyed (in 10 | |
| |years) |years) | |
|Ganja |2,20,977.191 Kg |3910.70 Kg |217066.491 kg |
| | | |(98.23%) |
|Opium |22.925 kg |0 |22.925 Kg |
| | | |(100%) |
|Charas |6.5 kg |0 |6.5 kg (100%) |
|Cocaine |851.096 kg |0 |851.096 kg |
| | | |(100%) |
|Others |85.125 kg + 103 |0 | |
| |Capsules + 81 | | |
| |Injections 26 Amp | | |
2. ASSAM
(The Information pertains only to the period of 2010-2012)
|Item |Total Quantity |Total Quantity |Difference |
| |Seized (In 10 |Destroyed (in 10 | |
| |years) |years) | |
|Ganja |203.54 Kg |136 Kg |67.54 (33.18%) |
|Heroin |.614 kg |0 |.214 Kg |
| | | |(34.853%) |
|Opium |30 gms |0 |30 gms (100%)|
|Others |755662 |41472 Nos. |714190 Nos. |
| | | |(94.5%) |
3. BIHAR
|Item |Total Quantity |Total Quantity |Difference |
| |Seized (In 10 |Destroyed (in 10 | |
| |years) |years) | |
|Ganja |45 Kg |0 |45 kg |
|Heroin |3.74 kg |0 |3.74 kg |
|Charas |48.853 kg |0 |48.853 kg |
|Poppy |100 kgs |0 |100 kgs |
|Straws | | | |
|Methqualon|1676 kgs |0 |1676 kgs |
|e | | | |
Note:- No destruction of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances have
taken place at Patna zonal unit.
4. CHHATTISGARH
|Item |Total Quantity |Total Quantity |Difference |
| |Seized (In 10 |Destroyed (in 10 | |
| |years) |years) | |
|Ganja |1,03,622.140 kg |3281.570 kg |1,00,340.57 |
| |Kg | |(96.77%) |
|Cannabis |52478 (Nos) |380 (Nos) |52098 (Nos) |
|Plants | | |(92.7%) |
|Brown Sugar |3.120 kg |0 |3.129 kg (100%)|
|Opium |1.460 kg |0 |1.460 kg (100%)|
|Opium Poppy |1558 pieces |0 |1558 pieces |
|Plant | | |(100%) |
|Green Opium |3600 kg |0 |3600 kg (100%) |
|Plant | | | |
5. CUSTOMS AND CENTRAL EXCISE
|Item |Total Quantity |Total Quantity |Difference |
| |Seized (In 10 |Destroyed (in 10 | |
| |years) |years) | |
|Opium |367.007 kg |658.525 kg |Destroyed more |
| | | |than seized |
|Morphine |58.393 kg |190 kg + 88930 Pcs |58.203 kg |
| | |Injections |(99.6%) |
|Heroine |1658.099 kg |739.687 kg |918.412 kg |
| | | |(55.3%) |
|Ganja |484124.056 kg |8,43,008.559 kg |Destroyed more |
| | | |than seized |
|Hashish |77350.076 kg |12298.578 kg |Destroyed more |
| | | |than seized |
|Cocaine |640.569 kg |0 |640.569 kg |
| | | |(100%) |
6. CHANDIGARH
|Item |Total Quantity |Total Quantity |Difference |
| |Seized (In 10 |Destroyed (in 10 | |
| |years) |years) | |
|Contraband |By relevant |900.179 Kgs |2305.444 Kgs |
| |authorities | |(71%) |
| |3205.623 Kgs | | |
|Morphine |58.393 kg |190kg + 88930 Pcs |58.203 kg |
| | |Injections |(99.6%) |
|Heroine |1658.099 kg |739.687 kg |918.412 kg |
| | | |(55.3%) |
|Ganja |484124.056 kg |8,43,008.559 kg |Destroyed more |
| | | |than seized |
|Hashish |77350.076 kg |12298.578 kg |Destroyed more |
| | | |than seized |
|Cocaine |640.569 kg |0 |640.569 kg |
| | | |(100%) |
7. DELHI
Delhi has provided two responses. One response has been provided by the
NCB, Delhi and the other by the police heads of each of the district.
The response by NCB, Delhi is as follows :-
|Item |Total Quantity |Total Quantity |Difference |
| |Seized (In 10 |Destroyed (in 10 | |
| |years) |years) | |
|Contraband |8891.8373 |680.376 kg |8211.4613 kg |
| | | |(92.34%) |
The Response by the police heads are as follows:-
|Item |Total Quantity |Total Quantity |Difference |
| |Seized (In 10 |Destroyed (in 10 | |
| |years) |years) | |
| |By relevant | | |
| |authorities | | |
|Contraband |52944.577 kg |32443.456 kg |20500.601 |
|(Hashish, | | |(38.72%) |
|Cocaine, | | | |
|Ganja, | | | |
|Heroin | | | |
|etc.) | | | |
|Contrabands|1020669 |0 |1020669 (100%)|
|(Chemical | | | |
|Substances | | | |
|in Tablets,| | | |
|Injections)| | | |
8. DAMAN AND DIU
The UT Daman and Diu has informed the Total quantity by way of a detailed
chart:
|Item |Total Quantity |Total Quantity |Difference |
| |Seized (In 10 |Destroyed (in 10 | |
| |years) |years) | |
| |By relevant | | |
| |authorities | | |
|Contraband |25.827 kgs |000 kgs |25.827 Kgs |
| | | |(100%) |
9. DIRECTORATE OF REVENUE INTELLIGENCE
|Item |Total Quantity |Total Quantity |Difference |
| |Seized (In 10 |Destroyed (in 10 | |
| |years) |years) | |
| |By relevant | | |
| |authorities | | |
|Contraband |174185.687 kg |2859.448 Kg |171326.239 |
| | | |(98.3%) |
10. GUJARAT
The Response of the state is divided into two parts.
One has been provided by the office of the Ministry of Home Affairs.
As per the said response the total amount of contraband seized in 10 years
are 28340.047 Kg. No division of the type has been provided.
The total destruction in the last 10 years however is only 132.375 Kg
The total amount of Contraband still in custody of the authorities is
28207.672 Kgs, i.e. 99.53% of the seized amount.
The response of the NCB Zonal Unit is as follows:
|Item |Total Quantity |Total Quantity |Difference |
| |Seized (In 10 |Destroyed (in 10 | |
| |years) |years) | |
|Charas |1421.14 kg |15.056 kgs |1406.084 kg |
| | | |(98.9%) |
|Opium |17.505 kg |0 |17.505 kg |
| | | |(100%) |
|Brown Sugar|2.03 kg |0 |2.03 kg (100%)|
|Heroin |3.066 kg |0 (981 gms of Heroin|3.066 kg |
| | |was destroyed in |(100%) |
| | |2000, however all | |
| | |the seizures have | |
| | |been made post 2003)| |
|Others |3766.126 kg + 299|525 kgs |3241.126 kgs |
| |ltrs. + 1022 | |(86.05%) + 229|
| |Tablets | |ltrs (100%) + |
| | | |1022 Tablets |
| | | |(100%) |
11. GOA
The UT Chandigarh has informed the Total quantity by way of a
detailed chart:
|Item |Total Quantity |Total Quantity |Difference |
| |Seized (In 10 |Destroyed (in 10 | |
| |years) |years) | |
| |By relevant | | |
| |authorities | | |
|Contraband |548.746 kgs. |000 kgs |548.7476 kgs |
| | | |(100%) |
12. HARYANA
|Item |Total Quantity |Total Quantity |Difference |
| |Seized (In 10 |Destroyed (in 10 | |
| |years) |years) | |
|Ganja |2604.077 kg |521.133 kg |2082.944 kg |
| | | |(79%) |
|Charas |7252.513 kg |533.46 kg |6719.053 kg |
| | | |(92.64%) |
|Opium |1086.387 kg |1972.860 |Destroyed more|
| | | |than seized |
|Smack |8200.00 kg |4169.919 kg |4030.081 kg |
| | | |(49.14%) |
|Heroine |1.046 kg |1.300 kg |Destroyed more|
| | | |than seized |
|Brown Sugar|2.001 kg |1.003 kg |998 kg |
| | | |(49.87%) |
|Cocaine |.325 kg |0 |.325 kg (100%)|
13. HIMACHAL PRADESH
The State of Himachal Pradesh has informed the Total quantity by way of a
detailed chart:
|Item |Total Quantity |Total Quantity |Difference |
| |Seized (In 10 |Destroyed (in 10 | |
| |years) |years) | |
|Contraband |17026.714 |1856.913 |15169.801 |
| | | |(89.09%) |
14. JHARKHAND
|Item |Total Quantity |Total Quantity |Difference |
| |Seized (In 10 |Destroyed (in 10 | |
| |years) |years) | |
|Ganja |1793.381 kg |0 (area of |1793.381 kg |
| | |cultivation has been|(100%) |
| | |destroyed) | |
|Opium |360.59 kg |0 |360.59 kg |
| | | |(100%) |
|Brown Sugar|1.576 kg |0 |1.576 kg |
| | | |(100%) |
|Heroine |546 kg |0 |546 kg (100%) |
15. KERALA
|Item |Total Quantity |Total Quantity |Difference |
| |Seized (In 10 |Destroyed (in 10 | |
| |years) |years) | |
|Ganja |7588.543 Kg |2740.926 kg |4847.617 kg |
| | | |(63.88%) |
|Heroine |.536 kg |0 |.536 kg (100%)|
|Hashish |12.368 kg |0 |12.368 (100%) |
|Charas |.063 kg |0 |.063 kg (100%)|
|Brown Sugar|8.432 kg |12.058 kg |Destroyed more|
| | | |than seized |
|Opium |23.697 kg |0 |23.697 kg |
| | | |(100%) |
16. KARNATAKA
The state of Karnataka divided its response in two parts. One is seizure
by Police and the Other is seizure by NCB
|Item |Total Quantity |Total Quantity |Difference |
| |Seized (In 10 |Destroyed (in 10 | |
| |years) |years) | |
|Contraband |By NCB | | |
| | | | |
| | |000 kgs |366.838 Kgs |
| |366.838 Kgs | |(100%) |
| | |12140.592 | |
| | | |15151.041 |
| |By relevant | |(55%) |
| |authorities | | |
| |27291.633 Kgs | | |
17. MAHARASHTRA
|Item |Total Quantity |Total Quantity |Difference |
| |Seized (In 10 |Destroyed (in 10 | |
| |years) |years) | |
|Ganja |1,14,082 kg |8750 kg |1,14,074 kg |
| | | |(92.33%) |
|Heroin |654 kg |228 kg |426 kg |
| | | |(65.13%) |
|Charas |2364.90 kg |471.735 |1893.165 |
| | | |(80.05%) |
|Opium |613.044 kg |47.135 kg |565.909 kg |
| | | |(92.31%) |
|Cocaine |11.049 kg |0 kg |11.049 kg |
| | | |(100%) |
18. MANIPUR
|Item |Total Quantity |Total Quantity |Difference |
| |Seized (In 10 |Destroyed (in 10 | |
| |years) |years) | |
|Heroin |37.534 kg. |12.498 kg |25.036 kg |
| | | |(66.072%) |
|Ganja |45343.25 kg |41963.389 kg |3379.861 kg |
| | |(Kindly refer to the|(7.45%) |
| | |Note) | |
|Opium |233.985 kg |0 |233.985 kg |
| | | |(100%) |
|Hashish |3.05 kg |0 |3.05 kg (100%)|
Note: The Total amount of Ganja seized post 2005 was 25913.225 kgs and the
same is still lying with the authorities since the last pretrial disposal
in 2005.
19. MADHYA PRADESH
Madhya Pradesh has divided its response in two parts. One is seizure by
Police and the other is seizure by NCB.
|Item |Total Quantity |Total Quantity |Difference |
| |Seized (In 10 |Destroyed (in 10 |In Kgs |
| |years) |years) | |
| |In Kgs |In Kgs | |
|Contraband |By Police- |By Police |By Police |
| |804376.528 |61384.805 |-742991.723 |
| | | |Kgs (92%) |
| | | | |
| |BY NCB | |Destroyed more|
| |348 kg | |than seized |
20. Ministry of Home Affairs NCB
|Item |Total Quantity |Total Quantity |Difference |
| |Seized (In 10 |Destroyed (in 10 | |
| |years) |years) | |
|Contraband |By relevant | | |
| |authorities | | |
| | |4476.482 kgs | |
| |5344.12 Kgs. | |867.638 (16%) |
21. ORISSA
Orissa has divided its response in two parts. One is seizure by Police and
the Other is seizure by Excise Officials.
|Item |Total Quantity |Total Quantity |Difference |
| |Seized (In 10 |Destroyed (in 10 | |
| |years) |years) | |
|Contraband |By Police |0.000 |By Police- |
| |88241.741 Kgs | |88241.741 Kgs |
| | | |(100%) |
| | |0.000 | |
| |By Excise | |By Excise |
| |34520.854 Kgs | |34520.854 Kgs |
| |(100%) | |(100%) |
22. PUNJAB
|Item |Total Quantity |Total Quantity |Difference |
| |Seized (In 10 |Destroyed (in 10 | |
| |years) |years) | |
|Poppy Husk |8,93,948.452 kg |4,00,678.069 kg |4,93,270.383 kg |
| | | |(55.17%) |
|Opium |4936.031 kg |965.818 kg |3970.213 kg |
| | | |(80.43%) |
|Smack |20045.293 kg |104.631 kg |19940.662 |
| | | |(99.47%) |
23. RAJASTHAN
|Item |Total Quantity |Total Quantity |Difference |
| |Seized (In 10 |Destroyed (in 10 | |
| |years) |years) | |
|Brown Sugar|146.996 kg |23.381 kg |123.615 kg |
| | | |(84.094%) |
|Heroine |173.216 kg |3.25 kg |169.966 kg |
| | | |(98.12%) |
|Smack |275.246 kg |82.423 kg |192.823 kg |
| | | |(70.05%) |
|Opium |6687.081 kg |2006.745 kg |4680.335 kg |
| | | |(69.99%) |
|Charas |935.602 kg |1192.309 |Destroyed more |
| | | |than seized |
|Ganja |176289.677 kg |2578.712 kg |174250.965 kg |
| | | |(98.84%) |
|Poppy Straw|99684.05 kgs |1,34,652.55 kg |Destroyed more |
| | | |than seized. |
24. SIKKIM
|Item |Total Quantity |Total Quantity |Difference |
| |Seized (In 10 |Destroyed (in 10 | |
| |years) |years) | |
| |By relevant | | |
| |authorities | | |
|N-10 Capsure |9156 |** |9156 |
| | | |(100%) |
|Spasmo Proxyvon|277367 |** |277367 |
|Capsule | | |(100%) |
|Corex/ |3033 |** |3033 (100%) |
|Phensidylerecod| | | |
|ex | | | |
|Others | |** |203.92 gms. |
** The State Government of Sikkim has replied that the destruction is
done as per the orders of the Trial Court on the conclusion of Trial.
However, no details related to disposal has been provided.
25. TAMIL NADU
|Item |Total Quantity |Total Quantity |Difference |
| |Seized (In 10 |Destroyed (in 10 | |
| |years) |years) | |
|Ganja (Dry |656778 kg |19366.98 kg |637411.02 jg |
|+ Green) | | |(97.051%) |
|Charas |13 kg |1 kg |12 kg (92.30%) |
|Heroin |66.42 kg |66.425 kg |0 |
|Cocaine |1 kg |15.4 kg |Destroyed more |
| | | |than seized |
|Brown Sugar|0.015 kg |0 |0.015 kg (100%) |
|Opium |30.4 kg |1.738 kg |29.262 kg |
| | | |(96.25%) |
|Hash Oil |10 kg |1 kg |9 kg (90%) |
|Tidigesic |13627 vials |4095 vials |9532 vials |
|inj. | | |(69.94%) |
|Norphine |112 amps |0 |112 amps (100%) |
|Bosikka |9 |0 |9 (100%) |
|Diazepam |9.085 kg + 2706 |4.51 (kg or vial not | |
| |vials |sure) | |
|Poppy |246.75 kg |125.05 kg |121.7 kg |
|Cap/Straws | | |(49.32%) |
|Avil |350 tabs + 55 |0 |350 tabs + 55 |
| |vials | |vials |
26. TRIPURA
|Item |Total Quantity |Total Quantity |Difference |
| |Seized (In 10 |Destroyed (in 10 | |
| |years) |years) | |
|Ganja |9178.8 |2642.5 kg |6536.3 kg |
| | | |(71.21%) |
|Ganja Dust |436 kg |87 kgs |349 kgs (80.04%)|
27. UTTAR PRADESH
There is huge discrepancy between the Quantity seized and the Quantity
destroyed.
|Item |Total Quantity |Total Quantity |Difference |
| |Seized (In 10 |Destroyed (in 10 | |
| |years) |years) | |
|Opium |1278.016 kg |198.025 kg |1079.99 kg |
| | | |(84.5%) |
|Smack |455.543 kg |244.443 kg |211.1 kg (46.3%)|
|Heroin |503.664 kg |13.759 kg |489.905 kg |
| | | |(97.2%) |
|Ganja |92525.859 |11,820.191 kg |80705.668 kg |
| | | |(87.22%) |
|Charas |9099.432 kg |2234.481 kg |6864.951 kg |
| | | |(75.44%) |
|Intoxicatin|3658.065 kg |1035.275 kg |2622.79 Kg |
|g Powder | | |(71.69%) |
|(Cocaine) | | | |
|Brown Sugar|51.455 kg |1.1 kg |51.355 kg |
| | | |(99.8%) |
|Posta Drug |16224.591 kg |5081.988 kg |11,142.603 kg |
| | | |(68.67%) |
28. UTTARAKHAND
|Item |Total Quantity |Total Quantity |Difference |
| |Seized (In 10 |Destroyed (in 10 | |
| |years) |years) | |
|Charas |1252.091 kg |330.459 kg |921.632 kg |
| | | |(73.60%) |
|Doda |6783.765 kg |330.459 kg |6453.306 |
| | | |(95.12%) |
|Opium |28.899 kg |1.859 kg |27.04 kg |
| | | |(93.567%) |
|Heroine |154.454 kg |0 |154.454 kg |
| | | |(100%) |
|Intoxicatin|22413 Nos |4668 Nos. |17745 Nos |
|g Tablets | | |(79.17%) |
|Ganja |1121.740 kg |508.300 kg |613.44 kg |
| | | |(54.686%) |
|Smack |8.761 kg + 1022 |0.432 kg + 530 |8.329 kg |
| |packets |Packets |(95.06%) + 492 |
| | | |Packets |
| | | |(48.140%) |
|Injection |1924 Nos |5 Nos. |1919 Nos |
| | | |(99.74%) |
|Brown Sugar|.389 kg |0 |.389 kg (100%) |
29. WEST BENGAL
|Item |Total Quantity |Total Quantity |Difference |
| |Seized (In 10 |Destroyed (in 10 | |
| |years) |years) | |
| |By relevant | | |
| |authorities | | |
|Contraband |88520.3317 kg |0 |88520.3317 kg |
| | | |(100%) |
Note:- West Bengal has stated that it does not have any immediate records
available of destruction.
5. In regard to the storage of NDPS substances, the State Governments
and the Central Agencies have furnished information which the learned
Amicus Curiae has tabulated as under:
Annexure D
|Delhi Govt. |Gujarat Govt. |Guwahati Govt. |
|Yes, specified store |No specific store. |NBC Guwahati Zonal Unit|
|for storage of the | |is running from a |
|seized contraband in | |rented house and one |
|Delhi Zonal Unit. | |secured room is |
| | |earmarked as storage |
| | |place. |
|Imphal Govt. |Mizoram Govt. |Tripura Govt. |
|Stored in godown of NCB|No specific store |No specified store. |
|-1 after sealing. | | |
|Meghalaya Govt. |Uttar Pradesh Govt. |Maharashtra Govt., Goa |
| | |and Daman Diu |
|Excise Malkhana is |UP has no specific |No specific store in |
|generally used to store|place for storage of |Maharashtra for |
|contrabands. |the narcotic drugs. |storage. |
|All district Excise | |In Goa: Malakhana at |
|office have their own | |Police Station. |
|Malkhana rooms. | |Daman & Diu and Dadar &|
| | |Nagar Haveli: Kept in |
| | |Malkhana Police |
| | |Station. Then sent to |
| | |storage of competent |
| | |Court after chargesheet|
| | |is filed. |
|Himachal Pradesh Govt. |Chhattisgarh Govt. |Andhra Pradesh Govt. |
|No specified area. |No separate storage. |No specified area. |
|Rajasthan Govt. |Sikkim Govt. |Uttarakhand Govt. |
|No specific store. |No storage. |No specific store. |
|Jharkhand Govt. |Kerala Govt. |Karnataka Govt. |
|No specific store. |No specific storage. |No notified store. |
|Madhya Pradesh Govt. |Orissa Govt. |Bihar Govt. |
|Yes, NCB Zonal Unit |No specific store. |Patna Zonal Unit of NCB|
|Indore ahs well-secured| |has specified room. |
|specific maalkhana | |Withdrawal only under |
|(Submissions by NCB | |order of the Court. |
|Indore Zonal unit) | | |
|No specific Store for | | |
|storage after seizure | | |
|by Police Station. | | |
|(Submissions by Police | | |
|Heads) | | |
|Punjab Govt. |Haryana Govt. |Chandigarh Govt. |
|No specified store. |Malkhana in all police |A Room called Malkhana |
| |stations for storage of|is specifically |
| |contraband Narcotics |designated to keep the |
| |Drugs and Psychotropic |seized contrabands. |
| |Substances. | |
|Tamil Nadu |Customs and Central |Directorate of Revenue |
| |Excise |Intelligence |
|No Specific storage |No specific storage is |No specific store of |
|space. |available |its own. |
|NCB, Jodhpur Zone |NCB, Chandigarh Zone |West Bengal |
|Yes, But no sub-zone |A separate room has |The seized goods are |
|available. |been specified for |stored in Police |
| |storage of seized |Station Malkhana under |
| |contraband. |the charge of a |
| | |designated Police |
| | |Officer and supervision|
| | |of officer in charge of|
| | |Police Station. |
6. Similarly, in answer to the query as to the steps taken at the time
of storage to determine the nature and the quantity of the substance being
stored and measures to prevent substitution and/or pilferage from the
stores, the State Governments have sent their replies which too have been
summarised by the Amicus Curiae in the following words:
ANNEXURE-F
iii. What are the steps taken at the time of storage to determine the
nature and quantity of the substance being store and measures to prevent
substitution and pilferage from stores?
|Delhi |Gujarat |Guwahati |Imphal |Mizoram |Tripura |
|Govt. |Govt. |Govt. |Govt. |Govt. |Govt. |
|Proper |Writer |Complete |Complete |Utmost care |Malkhana |
|entry in |head of |process of|process of|in weighing |officer |
|malkhana |Police |classifica|classifica|and |incharge |
|register |station |tion and |tion and |measurements|carefully |
|and |maintains |weighing |weighing |by |keeps the |
|malkhana |muddamal |of drugs |of drugs |officer-in-c|contraband|
|incharge |register |along with|along with|harge. |s in the |
|and |which has |measures |measures |@page 101 of|malkhana |
|properly |complete |of |of |submissions |after |
|locked |details. |prevention|prevention|by Mizoram |maintainin|
|and |All |of |of |Govt. |g |
|guarded |subsequent|pilferage |pilferage | |register. |
|@Pg 10 of|withdrawal|mentioned |mentioned | |@Pg.No.3 |
|Delhi |and |at |at | |of |
|Govt. |redisposit|@ Pg.No.52|@ Pg. No. | |submission|
|submissio|ion are |of |74 of | |by Tripura|
|n |also |Guwahati |Imphal | |Govt. |
| |reflected |Govt. |Govt. | | |
| |in the |submission|submission| | |
| |muddamal | | | | |
| |register | | | | |
| |@Pg.2 of | | | | |
| |Gujarat | | | | |
| |Govt. | | | | |
| |submission| | | | |
|Meghalaya|Uttar |Maharashtr|Himachal |Chhattisgar|Andhra |
|Govt. |Pradesh |a Govt., |Pradesh |h Govt. |Pradesh |
| |Govt. |Goa and |Govt. | |Govt. |
| | |Daman Diu.| | | |
|General |After |Contraband|NDPS is |Details of |During the |
|duty of |Seizure |is packed |seized by |all steps |storage the|
|detecting|the |and kept |investigat|to |details are|
|officer |concerned |safe with |ing |determine |entered in |
|to weigh,|drug is |Muddemal |officer. |the nature |storage |
|seal the |weighed. |Clerk in |After |and |room |
|contraban| |separate |samples |quantity of|register. |
|d with |Subsequent|cupboard. |are taken,|the |Store room |
|signature|ly a |@ Pg.6. |the same |substance |is duly |
|s of |sample is | |is seized |being store|sealed and |
|civilian |taken out |Goa: |by I.O. |and |armed |
|witnesses|of the bag|Contraband|affixing |measures to|guards/stat|
|with |and both |packed and|his own |prevent |ion watch |
|proper |are |sealed at |seal and |substitutio|are posted.|
|entry in |weighed |the spot |later |n and | |
|register |separately|of |resealed |pilferage | |
|and lock |. |seizure. |by SHO |from stores|@ pg.no. 2 |
|it. | |Entry in |before |elaborated |of A.P. |
|@pg.7 |Both the |Mudamma, |consigning|@ Pg.No. 3 |Govt. |
|Annex-A-2|sample and|register |it to the |of |submission |
|of |main stock|to show |safe |submissions| |
|Meghalaya|are |chain of |custody in|by | |
|Govt. |wrapped in|movements |police |Chhattisgar| |
|Submissio|a piece of|and its |malkhana |h Govt. | |
|n/ |cloth and |custody. |of the | | |
|---------|are |@ pg. 8. |Police | | |
|Acc. To |sealed. | |Station. | | |
|Report of| |Daman & | | | |
|Comm. Of |The sample|Diu and |@ Pg.No.3 | | |
|Customs @|is sent |Dadar & |of HP | | |
|Pg.67: |for |Nagar |Govt. | | |
|Stored in|forensic |Haveli: |submission| | |
|Central |testing |there are |. | | |
|Godown in|and the |very | | | |
|safes and|main |remote | | | |
|vaults |packed is |chances of| | | |
|with |sealed and|substituti| | | |
|double |kept in |on/ | | | |
|locking |the |pilferage | | | |
|system |malkhana. |as the | | | |
|under | |stored | | | |
|command |@ Pg.6 of |goods are | | | |
|of a |submission|subject to| | | |
|Gazetted |s by U.P. |periodical| | | |
|Officer. |Govt. |inspection| | | |
| | |. | | | |
| | |Page 9 of | | | |
| | |the | | | |
| | |Response | | | |
|Rajasthan |Sikkim |Uttarakhand|Jharkhand |Kerala |Karnataka |
|Govt. |Govt. |Govt. |Govt. |Govt. |Govt. |
|No |NDPS is | |NDPS |Material|During |
|specific |packed | |sample is |objects |recovery a |
|answer. |and | |sent to |is |pinch of the|
|However |sealed | |forensic |sealed |substance is|
|packing |under | |laboratory|and |tested with |
|resources |stamp of | |. For |packed |the help of |
|for |IO and | |preventing|properly|field drug |
|storage |nature | |substituti|. |test kit for|
|are used |and | |on, | |an |
|according |quantity | |details |Page 9 |indicative |
|to |recorded | |entered |of the |test. After|
|quantity |in | |into |Response|positive |
|and nature|presence | |station | |indicative |
|of the |of | |diary of | |result, the |
|contraband|individua| |the | |officer |
|. |l | |concerned | |makes |
| |witnesses| |police | |detailed |
|@ Pg.No. 2|. | |station. | |inventory. |
|of |Page 11 | |Complete | |The seized |
|submission|of the | |safety | |goods are |
|by |Response.| |measures | |stored in |
|Rajasthan | | |mentioned | |the |
|Govt. | | |in Annex-3| |departmental|
| | | |with the | |godown or |
| | | |govt. | |the judicial|
| | | |submission| |godown and |
| | | |. | |only a |
| | | | | |representati|
| | | |Page 5 of | |ve sample is|
| | | |the | |sent to the |
| | | |Response | |laboratory |
| | | | | |for chemical|
| | | | | |analysis. |
| | | | | |@ pg. 10 of |
| | | | | |submission |
| | | | | |by Karnataka|
| | | | | |Govt. |
|Madhya |Orissa |Bihar |Punjab |Haryana |Chandigarh |
|Pradesh |Govt. |Govt. |Govt. |Govt. |Govt. |
|Govt. | | | | | |
|By NCB |Seized |Seized |Police |Weekly and|Seized |
|Indore |drugs are |drugs are |officials |fortnightl|contraband |
|Zonal |sealed in |sealed and|deployed |y reports |is safely |
|Office. |such a |produced |at all |obtained |kept in |
|Seized |manner as |before the|NDPS |from all |Malkhana |
|contraband|to |Court and |Maalkhana |concerned |under lock.|
|wrapped in|minimize |then |stores. |regarding | |
|transparen|the |stored in |Case |seized/ |No more |
|t |chances of|Maalkhana |property |storage of|details |
|polythene |pilferage.|after |register |NDPS. |mentioned. |
|and then | |entry in |No. 19 is |Stock | |
|in white |After |registers.|maintained|Register | |
|cloth |producing | |. |is | |
|before |the seized|Pg. No. 3 |Procedure |maintained| |
|sealing |goods with|of |as per and|by field | |
|and |permission|submission|Punjab |units and | |
|signing |of court |by Bihar |Police |periodical| |
|it. |the drugs |Govt. |rules |checking | |
|Quality |are | |1934. |is done. | |
|and amount|deposited | |Inspection| | |
|of seized |in | |by gazette|@ pg. 121 | |
|drug is |maalkhana | |officers. |of | |
|also |in sealed | |@ pg.no. |submission| |
|mentioned |condition | |16 and 17 |of Haryana| |
|in the |with | |of |Govt. | |
|packet. |proper | |submission| | |
|@ Pg. 5 of|entry and | |by Punjab | | |
|submission|under the | |Govt. | | |
|s by M.P. |custody of| | | | |
|Govt. |Maalkhana | | | | |
| |Officer. | | | | |
|By police | | | | | |
|heads of |Page 2 and| | | | |
|districts:|3 of the | | | | |
|A seizure |Response. | | | | |
|memo is | | | | | |
|again | | | | | |
|prepared | | | | | |
|u/s 55 of | | | | | |
|NDPS Act | | | | | |
|at the | | | | | |
|time of | | | | | |
|storage in| | | | | |
|the police| | | | | |
|station | | | | | |
|malkhana | | | | | |
|and sealed| | | | | |
|by Station| | | | | |
|House | | | | | |
|Officer. | | | | | |
|Necessary | | | | | |
|entries | | | | | |
|are made | | | | | |
|in the | | | | | |
|Rojnamcha | | | | | |
|and seized| | | | | |
|property | | | | | |
|register | | | | | |
|maintained| | | | | |
|in the | | | | | |
|police | | | | | |
|station. | | | | | |
|At page 4 | | | | | |
|of the | | | | | |
|Response. | | | | | |
|Tamil Nadu |Directorate |NCB Zonal |NCB Zonal |Customs and| |
| |of Revenue |Officer, |Office, |Central | |
| |Intelligence |Jodhpur |Chandigarh |Excise | |
|No such |The sealed |As per |The seized |The seized | |
|instance |contained |Government |goods are |contraband | |
|has arisen.|containing |of India |stored lot |is | |
| |the seized |Notificatio|wise and |deposited | |
| |goods is |n, circular|stored |in the | |
| |handed over |1/89 page 3|under |godown/ | |
| |to Custodian |of the |proper lock|malkhana on| |
| |under proper |Response. |and key |the basis | |
| |documentation| |under the |of the | |
| |. The | |supervision|particulars| |
| |inventory, | |of ITBP |mentioned | |
| |seizure memo | |Guard. No |in the | |
| |as well as | |one other |seizure | |
| |the paper | |than the |memo/ | |
| |seals on the | |store in |panchnama. | |
| |sealed | |charge is |Proper and | |
| |container are| |authorized |secured | |
| |duly signed | |to enter |packing and| |
| |by the panch | |the store. |sealing of | |
| |witnesses, | | |the | |
| |accused and | |Page 6 of |contraband | |
| |seizing | |the |ensures its| |
| |officer. The| |Response. |safety. | |
| |custodian are| | |Page 11 of | |
| |responsible | | |the | |
| |for | | |Response. | |
| |appropriate | | | | |
| |action to | | | | |
| |prevent | | | | |
| |substitution | | | | |
| |and | | | | |
| |pilferage. | | | | |
|West Bengal| | | | | |
|The seized | | | | | |
|goods are | | | | | |
|packed | | | | | |
|labeled and| | | | | |
|sealed by | | | | | |
|the Officer| | | | | |
|and are | | | | | |
|handed over| | | | | |
|to the | | | | | |
|officer in | | | | | |
|charge with| | | | | |
|copy of | | | | | |
|seizure | | | | | |
|list. | | | | | |
|Details are| | | | | |
|also | | | | | |
|incorporate| | | | | |
|d in the | | | | | |
|Malkhana | | | | | |
|Register | | | | | |
|having | | | | | |
|counter | | | | | |
|signed of | | | | | |
|dealing | | | | | |
|officer. | | | | | |
7. The reports submitted by the State Governments and the Central
Agencies further claim that stock registers maintained at the storage sites
are periodically checked by the staff mentioned in the reports. Another
question that was asked from the State Governments and the Central Agency
relates to the condition of the storage facilities, shortage of storage
facilities, if any, and whether any steps have been taken or are being
taken to remove the deficiencies. Answers to those queries suggest that no
proper storage facilities are available in most of the States. For
instance, in Gujarat no special storage facility is available for keeping
the contraband, which is, therefore, stored in general muddamal room. In
Assam the NBC Guwahati Zonal Unit is said to be running from a rented house
and one secured room is earmarked for storage with triple locking system
under the supervision of the Superintendent. In Imphal, the store room is
overflowing with contraband. Since there is shortage of space, pre-trial
disposal process has been initiated to decrease congestion in godowns.
Although Mizoram Government claims that there is no lack of storage
facility, no information as to any specific storage facility being
earmarked for the purpose has been provided. In Tripura the enforcement
branch is said to be maintaining the malkhana used for storage of
contrabands. In Himachal Pradesh there is no storage facility except an old
building used for the purpose, while in Chhattisgarh the storage facility
is satisfactory but not sufficient for bulk storage. Similarly, Rajasthan
has scarcity of storage facility. Jharkhand has no separate storage
facility at all whereas Kerala has satisfactory storage facilities only in
some of the districts. In Orissa and Bihar the storage facilities are
totally insufficient and unsatisfactory. States of Haryana, Madhya Pradesh,
Goa, Daman Diu and Dadar & Nagar Haveli and Andhra Pradesh claim to have no
problems with storage facility while Tamil Nadu does not have any separate
storage.
8. Directorate of Revenue Intelligence has not provided any information
while NCB Zonal Office, Jodhpur has no shortage of space. NCB Zonal Office,
Chandigarh has reported insufficiency of space and has started the process
for construction of a specified storage facility. Customs and Central
Excise Authority has reported that their godown is full and no more space
is available.
9. In answer to the question as to who is authorised to apply to the
Court to destroy the seized contraband and whether there has been any
failure or dereliction in making such applications and whether any person
having technical knowledge of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substance
(natural and synthetic) is associated with the process of destruction of
the contraband, the reply submitted by the State Governments suggest that
different persons in different States have been authorised to make such
applications to the Courts concerned except in Tripura where no particular
person is authorised. In some cases Officer-in- charge of the Police
Station has been authorised while in others the I.O. is also empowered to
apply for permission to destroy the contraband. In answer to the question
whether any action has been taken against anyone who should have applied
for permission to destroy the narcotics but had not done so, State
Governments have all answered in the negative implying thereby that either
no dereliction of duty has occurred on the part of any officer competent to
apply for destruction or no action has been taken for any such dereliction.
10. Similarly, regarding the steps taken at the time of destruction to
determine the nature and quantity of the substance being destroyed, the
reports submitted by the State Governments give varying answers. There is
no uniformity in the procedure adopted by those associated or in charge of
the process of destruction. The reports suggest as if adequate steps are
taken to prevent damage, loss, pilferage and tampering/substitution of the
narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances from the point of search to the
point of destruction but there is no uniformity or standard procedure
prescribed or followed in that regard. Having said that we must mention
that we are in these proceedings concerned with the following three issues
only for the present:
Seizure and sampling of the Narcotic drugs and Psychotropic substances
their storage and
their destruction
Seizure and sampling:
11. Section 52-A(1) of the NDPS Act, 1985 empowers the Central Government
to prescribe by a notification the procedure to be followed for seizure,
storage and disposal of drugs and psychotropic substances. The Central
Government have in exercise of that power issued Standing Order No. 1/89
which prescribes the procedure to be followed while conducting seizure of
the contraband. Two subsequent standing orders one dated 10.05.2007 and the
other dated 16.01.2015 deal with disposal and destruction of seized
contraband and do not alter or add to the earlier standing order that
prescribes the procedure for conducting seizures. Para 2.2 of the Standing
Order 1/89 states that samples must be taken from the seized contrabands on
the spot at the time of recovery itself. It reads:
“2.2. All the packages/containers shall be serially numbered and kept in
lots for sampling. Samples from the narcotic drugs and psychotropic
substances seized, shall be drawn on the spot of recovery, in duplicate, in
the presence of search witnesses (Panchas) and the person from whose
possession the drug is recovered, and a mention to this effect should
invariably be made in the panchnama drawn on the spot.”
Most of the States, however, claim that no samples are drawn at the time of
seizure. Directorate of Revenue Intelligence is by far the only agency
which claims that samples are drawn at the time of seizure, while Narcotics
Control Bureau asserts that it does not do so. There is thus no uniform
practice or procedure being followed by the States or the Central agencies
in the matter of drawing of samples. This is, therefore, an area that needs
to be suitably addressed in the light of the statutory provisions which
ought to be strictly observed given the seriousness of the offences under
the Act and the punishment prescribed by law in case the same are proved.
We propose to deal with the issue no matter briefly in an attempt to remove
the confusion that prevails regarding the true position as regards drawing
of samples.
12. Section 52A as amended by Act 16 of 2014, deals with disposal of
seized drugs and psychotropic substances. It reads:
“Section 52A : Disposal of seized narcotic drugs and psychotropic
substances.
(1) The Central Government may, having regard to the hazardous nature of
any narcotic drugs or psychotropic substances, their vulnerability to
theft, substitution, constraints of proper storage space or any other
relevant considerations, by notification published in the Official Gazette,
specify such narcotic drugs or psychotropic substances or class of narcotic
drugs or class of psychotropic substances which shall, as soon as may be
after their seizure, be disposed of by such officer and in such manner as
that Government may from time to time, determine after following the
procedure hereinafter specified.
(2) Where any narcotic drug or psychotropic substance has been seized and
forwarded to the officer-in-charge of the nearest police station or to the
officer empowered under section 53, the officer referred to in sub-section
(1) shall prepare an inventory of such narcotic drugs or psychotropic
substances containing such details relating to their description, quality,
quantity, mode of packing, marks, numbers or such other identifying
particulars of the narcotic drugs or psychotropic substances or the packing
in which they are packed, country of origin and other particulars as the
officer referred to in sub-section (1) may consider relevant to the
identity of the narcotic drugs or psychotropic substances in any
proceedings under this Act and make an application, to any Magistrate for
the purpose of-
(a) certifying the correctness of the inventory so prepared; or
(b) taking, in the presence of such Magistrate, photographs of such drugs
or substances and certifying such photographs as true; or
(c) allowing to draw representative samples of such drugs or substances, in
the presence of such Magistrate and certifying the correctness of any list
of samples so drawn.
(3) When an application is made under sub-section (2), the Magistrate
shall, as soon as may be, allow the application.
(4) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (1
of 1872) or the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), every court
trying an offence under this Act, shall treat the inventory, the
photographs of [narcotic drugs, psychotropic substances, controlled
substances or conveyances] and any list of samples drawn under sub-section
(2) and certified by the Magistrate, as primary evidence in respect of such
offence.]”
13. It is manifest from Section 52A (2)(c) (supra) that upon seizure of
the contraband the same has to be forwarded either to the officer in-charge
of the nearest police station or to the officer empowered under Section 53
who shall prepare an inventory as stipulated in the said provision and make
an application to the Magistrate for purposes of (a) certifying the
correctness of the inventory (b) certifying photographs of such drugs or
substances taken before the Magistrate as true and (c) to draw
representative samples in the presence of the Magistrate and certifying the
correctness of the list of samples so drawn. Sub-section (3) of Section 52-
A requires that the Magistrate shall as soon as may be allow the
application. This implies that no sooner the seizure is effected and the
contraband forwarded to the officer in charge of the Police Station or the
officer empowered, the officer concerned is in law duty bound to approach
the Magistrate for the purposes mentioned above including grant of
permission to draw representative samples in his presence, which samples
will then be enlisted and the correctness of the list of samples so drawn
certified by the Magistrate. In other words, the process of drawing of
samples has to be in the presence and under the supervision of the
Magistrate and the entire exercise has to be certified by him to be
correct. The question of drawing of samples at the time of seizure which,
more often than not, takes place in the absence of the Magistrate does not
in the above scheme of things arise. This is so especially when according
to Section 52-A(4) of the Act, samples drawn and certified by the
Magistrate in compliance with sub-section (2) and (3) of Section 52-A above
constitute primary evidence for the purpose of the trial. Suffice it to
say that there is no provision in the Act that mandates taking of samples
at the time of seizure. That is perhaps why none of the States claim to be
taking samples at the time of seizure. Be that as it may, a conflict
between the statutory provision governing taking of samples and the
standing order issued by the Central Government is evident when the two are
placed in juxtaposition. There is no gainsaid that such a conflict shall
have to be resolved in favour of the statute on first principles of
interpretation but the continuance of the statutory notification in its
present form is bound to create confusion in the minds of the authorities
concerned instead of helping them in the discharge of their duties. The
Central Government would, therefore, do well, to re-examine the matter and
take suitable steps in the above direction.
14. Mr. Sinha, learned Amicus, argues that if an amendment of the Act
stipulating that the samples be taken at the time of seizure is not
possible, the least that ought to be done is to make it obligatory for the
officer conducting the seizure to apply to the Magistrate for drawing of
samples and certification etc. without any loss of time. The officer
conducting the seizure is also obliged to report the act of seizure and the
making of the application to the superior officer in writing so that there
is a certain amount of accountability in the entire exercise, which as at
present gets neglected for a variety of reasons. There is in our opinion
no manner of doubt that the seizure of the contraband must be followed by
an application for drawing of samples and certification as contemplated
under the Act. There is equally no doubt that the process of making any
such application and resultant sampling and certification cannot be left to
the whims of the officers concerned. The scheme of the Act in general and
Section 52-A in particular, does not brook any delay in the matter of
making of an application or the drawing of samples and certification. While
we see no room for prescribing or reading a time frame into the provision,
we are of the view that an application for sampling and certification ought
to be made without undue delay and the Magistrate on receipt of any such
application will be expected to attend to the application and do the
needful, within a reasonable period and without any undue delay or
procrastination as is mandated by sub-section (3) of Section 52A (supra).
We hope and trust that the High Courts will keep a close watch on the
performance of the Magistrates in this regard and through the Magistrates
on the agencies that are dealing with the menace of drugs which has taken
alarming dimensions in this country partly because of the ineffective and
lackadaisical enforcement of the laws and procedures and cavalier manner in
which the agencies and at times Magistracy in this country addresses a
problem of such serious dimensions.
STORAGE:
15. The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 does not
make any special provision regulating storage of the contraband substances.
All that Section 55 of the Act envisages is that the officer in charge of a
Police Station shall take charge of and keep in safe custody the seized
article pending orders of the Magistrate concerned. There is no provision
nor was any such provision pointed out to us by learned counsel for the
parties prescribing the nature of the storage facility to be used for
storage of the contraband substances. Even so the importance of adequate
storage facilities for safe deposit and storage of the contraband material
has been recognised by the Government inasmuch as Standing Order No.1/89
has made specific provisions in regard to the same. Section III of the said
Order deals with “Receipt of Drugs in Godowns and Procedure” which inter
alia provides that all drugs shall invariably be stored in “safes and
vaults” provided with double locking system and that the agencies of the
Central and the State Governments may specifically designate their godowns
for storage purposes and such godowns should be selected keeping in view
their security angle, juxtaposition to courts etc. We may usefully extract
paras 3.2 to 3.9 comprising Section III supra at this stage for ready
reference:
“3.2. All drugs invariably be stored in safes and vaults provided with
double-locking system. Agencies of the Central and State Governments, may
specifically, designate their godowns for storage purposes. The godowns
should be selected keeping in view their security angle, juxtaposition to
courts etc.
3.3 Such godowns, as a matter of rule, shall be placed under the over-all
supervision and charge of a Gazetted Officer of the respective enforcement
agency, who shall exercise utmost care, circumspection and personal
supervision as far as possible. Each seizing officer shall deposit the
drugs fully packed and sealed in the godown within 48 hours of such
seizure, with a forwarding memo indicating NDPS Crime No. as per Crime and
Prosecution (C & P Register) under the new law, name of the accused,
reference of test memo, description of the drugs, total no. of
packages/containers etc.
3.4 The seizing officer, after obtaining an acknowledgement for such
deposit in the format (Annexure-I), shall hand acknowledged over such to
the Investigation Officer of the case along with the case dossiers for
further proceedings.
3.5 The officer-in-charge of the godown, before accepting the deposit of
drugs, shall ensure that the same are properly packed and sealed. He shall
also arrange the packages/containers (case-wise and lot-wise) for quick
retrieval etc.
3.6 The godown-in-charge is required to maintain a register wherein
entries of receipt should be made as per format at Annexure-II.
3.7 It shall be incumbent upon the Inspecting Officers of the various
Departments mentioned at Annexure II to make frequent visits to the godowns
for ensuring adequate security and safety and for taking measures for
timely disposal of drugs. The Inspecting Officers should record their
remarks/observations against Col. 15 of the Format at Annexure-II.
3.8 The Heads of the respective enforcement agencies (both Central and
State Governments) may prescribe such periodical reports and returns, as
they may deem fit, to monitor the safe receipt, deposit, storage,
accounting and disposal of seized drugs.
3.9 Since the early disposal of drugs assumes utmost consideration and
importance, the enforcement agencies may obtain orders for pre-trial
disposal of drugs and other articles (including conveyance, if any) by
having recourse to the provisions of sub-section (2) of Section 52A of the
Act.”
It is evident from a plain reading of para 3.2 (supra) that storage of all
drugs in safes and vaults has been made mandatory and that agencies of the
Central and the State Governments have been permitted to designate their
godowns for storage purposes. It is also clear that keeping in view the
importance of protecting the seized drugs against theft, substitution or
pilferage the Central Government has prescribed that such godowns shall be
placed under the overall supervision and charge of a gazetted officer of
the respective enforcement agencies who shall exercise utmost care,
circumspection and personal supervision over the storage facilities. The
provision contained in paras 3.5, 3.6, 3.7 and 3.8 also are aimed at
ensuring that the godown or storage facility is satisfactory and those in-
charge of the same are made accountable for its upkeep and effective
management. Subsequent Notification including Notification dated 16th
January, 2015 have in no way diluted the above requirement. The result is
that there is a statutory framework which governs the storage of drugs and
matters relating and incidental thereto. The question is whether the said
statutory mechanism has been effectively implemented by the Central
Government agencies and by the State Governments. Our answer regretfully
is in the negative. It is evident from the responses received from the
State and the Central Government agencies that no notified storage facility-
godown has been established for storage of the seized drugs. Even the
Narcotics Control Bureau has admitted to using mallkhana of the Courts for
storage of the seized drugs in certain cases and in certain circumstances.
The Customs and Central Excise Department and DRI have also stated that
they have no designated storage facility for storage of contraband. The
position in the States is no different. Due to non-availability of any
designated godown-facility with adequate vaults and double lock system, the
seized contraband is stored in police maalkhana which is a common storage
facility for all kinds of goods and weapons seized in connection with all
kinds of offences including those specified by the IPC. This is a totally
unhappy and unacceptable situation to say the least. It is indeed
unfortunate that even after a lapse of 26 years since Standing Order No.
1/89 was issued, the Central Government or its agencies and the State
Governments have paid little or no attention to the need for providing
adequate storage facilities of the kind stipulated in Standing Order No.
1/89 with the necessary supervisory and other controls prescribed in
Section III of the said order. The result is that while Standing Order No.
1/89 very early in point of time recognized the need for providing adequate
and effective storage facilities by the States and the Central Government
agencies, the failure on the part of the Central Government and the State
Governments to provide for such storage has defeated, if not completely
negated the very purpose underlying the said notification and the
provisions made therein. There is as on date hardly any credible protection
against theft, replacement, pilferage and destruction of the seized drugs
on account of the wholly unsatisfactory and unscientific method of storage
of drugs and psychotropic substances which at times hit the headlines in
newspapers on account of what is often described by the agencies as “big
catch” worth crores of rupees in the international market. What has defied
our understanding is the neglect on the part of the Central Government and
its agencies and the State Governments in realizing the importance of the
storage facilities and in providing for the same to prevent hazardous and
at times lethal substances with great potential to do harm to those who use
the same from being replaced, pilfered, stolen or siphoned out on account
of very poor supervision, control or invigilation over such storage
facilities. The learned amicus has in that view very rightly argued that
there is a complete failure on the part of the Central Government and its
agencies as also the State Governments in taking adequate steps for
providing proper storage facilities with proper system of supervision and
control over the drugs that are stored in the same. It was contended by
Mr. Sinha, and in our opinion rightly so, that the cumulative effect of the
reports submitted by the States and the Central agencies is that only 16%
of the contrabands seized between 2002 to 2012 have been actually disposed
of. What happened to the remaining 84% of such seizures is anybody’s guess
and if it is still lying in the police maalkhana, why has nobody ever
bothered to apply for their disposal according to the procedure established
by law is hard to fathom. The fact that the States and the Central
Government agencies have accepted that no specific register is maintained
by the State Police and that general maalkhana register alone is being
maintained for the seized drugs shows the neglect of all concerned towards
this important aspect and the cavalier manner in which the issue regarding
storage of ceased drugs is approached by them. Absence of periodical
inspection of the storage facility and the absence of any record suggesting
that any inspection has been carried out by any of the officers shows a
complete failure bordering criminal negligence by officers who are supposed
to be taking action in this regard but have failed to do so.
16. The menace of drugs in this country, as observed earlier has alarming
dimensions and proportions. Studies based on conferences and seminars have
very often shown that the menace is deep rooted not only because drug
lords have the money power and transnational links but also because the
enforcement agencies like the Police and at times politicians in power help
them in carrying on what is known to be a money spinning and flourishing
trade. We only hope that the failure of the Central Government agencies
and the State Governments in providing what is the bare minimum in terms of
infrastructure required to arrest the growing menace and prevent pilferage
and re-circulation of drugs back into the market is not on account of any
unholy connect between the drug traffickers and the enforcement agencies.
We would comfort ourselves by presuming them to be relatable only to apathy
and indifference and hope that the system does not get corrupted by
continued neglect lest all hopes are lost in the fight against drug menace
which are eating into the vitals of our society. It is in that spirit that
we deem it necessary to issue appropriate directions to the Central
Government agencies and to the States to set up adequate storage facilities
with effective supervisory and regulatory controls as prescribed in
Notification No. 1/89.
Disposal of Drugs:
17. Section 52A as amended provides for disposal of the seized contraband
in the manner stipulated by the Government under Clause 1 of that Section.
Notification dated 16th January, 2015 has, in supersession of the earlier
notification dated 10th May, 2007 not only stipulates that all drugs and
psychotropic substances have to be disposed off but also identifies the
officers who shall initiate action for disposal and the procedure to be
followed for such disposal. Para 4 of the Notification inter alia, provides
that officer-in-charge of the Police Station shall within 30 days from the
date of receipt of chemical analysis report of drugs, psychotropic
substances or controlled substances apply to any Magistrate under Section
52A(2) in terms of Annexure 2 to the said Notification.
18. Sub-para (2) of Para (4) provides that after the Magistrate allows
the application under sub-section (3) of Section 52A, the officer mentioned
in sub para (1) of Para (4) shall preserve the certified inventory,
photographs and samples drawn in the presence of the Magistrate as primary
evidence for the case and submit details of seized items to the Chairman of
the Drugs Disposal committee for a decision by the Committee on the
question of disposal. The officer shall also send a copy of the details
along with the items seized to the officer in-charge of the godown. Para
(5) of the notification provides for constitution of the Drugs Disposal
Committee while para (6) specifies the functions which the Committee shall
perform. In para (7) the notification provides for procedure to be followed
with regard to disposal of the seized items, while para (8) stipulates the
quantity or the value upto which the Drugs Disposal Committee can order
disposal of the seized items. In terms of proviso to para (8) if the
consignments are larger in quantity or of higher value than those indicated
in the table, the Drugs Disposal Committee is required to send its
recommendations to the head of the department who shall then order their
disposal by a high level Drugs Disposal Committee specially constituted for
that purpose. Para (9) prescribes the mode of disposal of the drugs, while
para (10) requires the Committee to intimate to the head of the Department
the programme of destruction and vest the head of the Department with the
power to conduct a surprise check or depute an officer to conduct such
checks on destruction operation. Para (11) deals with certificate of
destruction while paras (12) and (13) deal with details of sale to be
entered into the godown register and communication to be sent to Narcotic
Control Bureau.
19. There are two other aspects that need to be noted at this stage. The
first is that notification dated 16th January, 2015 does not in terms
supersede Standing Order No. 1/89 insofar as the said Standing Order also
prescribes the procedure to be followed for disposal of Narcotic Drugs and
Psychotropic and controlled Substances and Conveyances. Specific
overriding of the earlier Standing Order would have avoided a certain
amount of confusion which is evident on account of simultaneous presence of
Standing Order No. 1/89 and notification dated 16th January, 2015. For
instance in para (1) of Standing Order No. 1/89 only certain narcotic drugs
and psychotropic substances enumerated therein could be disposed of while
notification dated 16th January, 2015 provides for disposal of all Narcotic
Drugs and Psychotropic and controlled Substances and Conveyances. Again in
terms of Standing Order No. 1/89 the procedure for making of application
was marginally different from the one stipulated in Notification dated 16th
January, 2015 not only insofar as the procedure related to the officers who
could make the application is concerned but also in relation to the
procedure that the DDC would follow while directing disposal. In both the
notifications are prescribed the limits upto which the disposal could be
directed. In case of excess quantity the disposal under the Standing Order
No. 1/89 had to be done in the presence of the head of the Department
whereas according to notification of 2015 in the event of excess quantity
or value the disposal has to be by a high level Drug Disposal Committee to
be constituted by the head of the Department. Again while Standing Order
No. 1/89 specifically required the approval of the Court for disposal,
notification dated 16th January, 2015 does not stipulate such approval as a
specific condition. Be that as it may, to the extent the subsequent
notification prescribes a different procedure, we treat the earlier
notification/Standing Order No. 1/89 to have been superseded. In order to
avoid any confusion arising out of the continued presence of two
notifications on the same subject we make it clear that disposal of
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic and controlled Substances and Conveyances
shall be carried out in the following manner till such time the Government
prescribes a different procedure for the same:
Cases where the trial is concluded and proceedings in appeal/revision have
all concluded finally:
In cases that stood finally concluded at the trial, appeal, revision and
further appeals, if any, before 29th May, 1989 the continued storage of
drugs and Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic and controlled Substances and
Conveyances is of no consequence not only because of the considerable lapse
of time since the conclusion of the proceedings but also because the
process of certification and disposal after verification and testing may be
an idle formality. We say so because even if upon verification and further
testing of the seized contraband in such already concluded cases it is
found that the same is either replaced, stolen or pilferaged, it will be
difficult if not impossible to fix the responsibility for such theft,
replacement or pilferage at this distant point in time. That apart, the
storage facility available with the States, in whatever satisfactory or
unsatisfactory conditions the same exist, are reported to be over-flowing
with seized contraband goods. It would, therefore, be just and proper to
direct that the Drugs Disposal Committees of the States and the Central
agencies shall take stock of all such seized contrabands and take steps for
their disposal without any further verification, testing or sampling
whatsoever. The concerned heads of the Department shall personally
supervise the process of destruction of drugs so identified for disposal.
To the extent the seized Drugs and Narcotic Substances continue to choke
the storage facilities and tempt the unscrupulous to indulge in pilferage
and theft for sale or circulation in the market, the disposal of the stocks
will reduce the hazards that go with their continued storage and
availability in the market.
Drugs that are seized after May, 1989 and where the trial and appeal and
revision have also been finally disposed of:
In this category of cases while the seizure may have taken place after the
introduction of Section 52A in the Statute book the non-disposal of the
drugs over a long period of time would also make it difficult to identify
individuals who are responsible for pilferage, theft, replacement or such
other mischief in connection with such seized contraband. The requirement
of para 5.5 of standing order No. 1/89 for such drugs to be disposed of
after getting the same tested will also be an exercise in futility and
impractical at this distant point in time. Since the trials stand
concluded and so also the proceedings in appeal, Revision etc. insistence
upon sending the sample from such drugs for testing before the same are
disposed of will be a fruitless exercise which can be dispensed with having
regard to the totality of the circumstances and the conditions prevalent in
the maalkhanas and the so called godowns and storage facilities. The DDCs
shall accordingly take stock of all such Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic
and controlled Substances and Conveyances in relation to which the trial of
the accused persons has finally concluded and the proceedings have attained
finality at all levels in the judicial hierarchy. The DDCs shall then take
steps to have such stock also destroyed under the direct supervision of the
head of the Department concerned.
(3) cases in which the proceedings are still pending before the Courts at
the level of trial court, appellate court or before the Supreme Court:
In such cases the heads of the Department concerned shall ensure that
appropriate applications are moved by the officers competent to do so under
Notification dated 16th January, 2015 before the Drugs Disposal Committees
concerned and steps for disposal of such Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic
and controlled Substances and Conveyances taken without any further loss of
time.
20. To sum up we direct as under:
No sooner the seizure of any Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic and controlled
Substances and Conveyances is effected, the same shall be forwarded to the
officer in-charge of the nearest police station or to the officer empowered
under Section 53 of the Act. The officer concerned shall then approach the
Magistrate with an application under Section 52A(ii) of the Act, which
shall be allowed by the Magistrate as soon as may be required under Sub-
Section 3 of Section 52A, as discussed by us in the body of this judgment
under the heading ‘seizure and sampling’. The sampling shall be done under
the supervision of the magistrate as discussed in paras 13 and 14 of this
order.
The Central Government and its agencies and so also the State Governments
shall within six months from today take appropriate steps to set up storage
facilities for the exclusive storage of seized Narcotic Drugs and
Psychotropic and controlled Substances and Conveyances duly equipped with
vaults and double locking system to prevent theft, pilferage or replacement
of the seized drugs. The Central Government and the State Governments shall
also designate an officer each for their respective storage facility and
provide for other steps, measures as stipulated in Standing Order No. 1/89
to ensure proper security against theft, pilferage or replacement of the
seized drugs.
The Central Government and the State Governments shall be free to set up a
storage facility for each district in the States and depending upon the
extent of seizure and store required, one storage facility for more than
one districts.
Disposal of the seized drugs currently lying in the police maalkhans and
other places used for storage shall be carried out by the DDCs concerned in
terms of the directions issued by us in the body of this judgment under the
heading ’disposal of drugs’.
21. Keeping in view the importance of the subject we request the Chief
Justices of the High Courts concerned to appoint a Committee of Judges on
the administrative side to supervise and monitor progress made by the
respective States in regard to the compliance with the above directions and
wherever necessary, to issue appropriate directions for a speedy action on
the administrative and even on the judicial side in public interest
wherever considered necessary.
22. List the appeal for final hearing now on an early date.
……………………….……..……J.
(T.S. THAKUR)
………………………….…..……J.
(KURIAN JOSEPH)
New Delhi
January 28, 2016