Bombay High Court says drug addiction a 'quasi pandemic', calls for model FIR in NDPS cases

The Bombay High Court on Tuesday described drug addiction as a "quasi pandemic" and called for a balance between fighting the drug trade and safeguarding individual liberties [Chandrabhan Janardhan Yadav and Ors v State of Maharashtra]..Justice Milind Jadhav also batted for the implementation of a model first information report (FIR) to address the issue of procedural irregularities when it comes to cases under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (NDPS Act). The Court emphasized the importance of adhering to legal procedures in narcotics cases while stressing that courts should not mechanically reject bail applications, as this could lead to unjust detentions.“The miscreants dealing in drugs in society need to be dealt with an iron fist but it cannot be at the cost of liberty of an individual,” the Court said. Mechanically rejecting bail pleas could lead to innocent persons being arrested arbitrarily and remaining in jail for years, the single-judge cautioned.“My judicial ex-ante thinking makes me arrive at a situation where if courts would venture into the exercise of mechanically rejecting Bail Applications on every occasion when the embargo under Section 37 is attracted – it will result in an unjust situation where even an innocent individual may be arrested in an arbitrary manner and be made to languish in jail for years pending trial indefinitely,” the order said. .The case concerned four medical representatives—Chandrabhan Janardhan Yadav, Sandip Rambriksh Prajapati, Vinod Rambachhan Prajapati, and Kunjal Bhagwan Vishwakarma—who were arrested for allegedly trafficking large quantities of controlled substances, including Codeine Phosphate syrup, Nitrazepam tablets, and Alprazolam tablets. The defense highlighted procedural lapses, including missing documents like the Form 5 certificate for drug seizures. .In response to the growing number of acquittals in NDPS cases due to such irregularities, Justice Jadhav cited a recent communication from the Bureau of Police Research and Development (BPRD) urging the implementation of a model FIR.The Court referred to a communication from the BPRD, dated November 18, 2024, which introduced a model FIR for registering narcotics cases under Section 52 of the NDPS Act.“This communication is issued in view of the fact that in recent times, a number of NDPS cases have resulted in 'Acquittal' in Courts due to procedural irregularities such as compliance of Section 52 of the NDPS Act,” the Court noted. The model FIR and accompanying guidelines aim to reduce procedural flaws and standardize investigations. It contains several key components designed to ensure consistency and compliance in narcotics investigations under the NDPS Act. .It includes a standardized FIR format, a flow chart outlining the step-by-step procedure for registering cases, and detailed Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) to guide investigators. Additionally, the model provides specific guidelines on documentation, such as the mandatory Form 5 certificate for drug seizures, and a template format for the proper certification of the inventory, photographs, and samples of seized narcotics. These guidelines aim to address procedural lapses that have led to acquittals in the past, ensuring a more uniform and legally compliant approach to narcotics-related cases..The Court emphasized the urgency of implementing these reforms, instructing the police to strictly adhere to the NDPS Act and share the guidelines with all officers and prosecuting agencies. “I direct the Registry of this Court to send a copy of this Judgement to all Commissioners of Police / Superintendent of Police in each district of the state for implementing the provisions of the NDPS Act and Rules strictly through the investigating agencies authorized under the NDPS Act. The said Commissioner of Police / Superintendent of Police of each district / region are directed to provide a copy of the entire guidelines to all Police Stations under their Jurisdiction / Prosecuting agencies under the NDPS Act for following the same,” he said..It is the duty of the investigating authority to ensure strict compliance of procedure, the Court underscored. "This is because Liberty of an accused is too precious of a right to be taken away on the basis of flimsy / arbitrary procedure". He added, "We as a system also need to invest our resources on educating our statutory officers so as to enable them to discharge their wide powers with legal prudence and in accordance with the statute/ Rules as prescribed," the Court stated..Advocate Ayaz Khan along with advocates Dilip Mishra, Zehra Charania and Mallika Sharma appeared for three of the accused. Advocate Supriya Arun Pandey instructed by Karmarkar and Associates appeared for another accused Kunjal Bhagwan Vishwakarma.Additional Public Prosecutors Hitendra Dedhia, Sukanta Karmakar appeared for State. .[Read Order]