Politicians, drug smugglers complement each other, nexus difficult to break: HC

THE COURT SAID POLITICIANS REQUIRE EASY MONEY AND MUSCLE POWER, WHICH DRUG SMUGGLERS ARE MORE THAN WILLING TO PROVIDE

CHANDIGARH: The high court has lamented that the politician-smuggler nexus is very difficult to break in drugs cases because they complement each other. “…politicians require easy money and muscle power for their political aims, which the drug smugglers are more than willing to provide. In return, they seek political patronage so that their nefarious activities go unchecked and without hindrance,” the bench of justice HS Madaan observed, adding that the political patronage provided to drug traffickers meant that the law enforcement agencies of the region would be under pressure from political bosses and turn a blind eye to activities of drug smugglers.

The bench was dealing with bail pleas in a 2019 FIR registered in Sangrur. The allegations were that during elections, one of the accused had got 2 quintals of poppy husk from a person in Tohana area of Haryana. Those accused in Haryana were named by the main accused in his disclosure statements. They were before court seeking anticipatory bail and arguing that on merely basis of disclosure statements, they can’t be arrested. The issue of right to equality too was raised before the bench.

The court observed that the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, has met with limited success in checking drug trafficking and drug abuse and the main reason for it is laxity in the implementation. “It is a lucrative business; many a times smugglers are having political patronage in running the racket and police too have been found hand in glove in some cases. The end result is that drug peddling is flourishing day by day instead of being brought under control,” the court said further adding that faulty probes and failure to implement provisions of the law are another reason for the menace. The bench also criticised the role of judiciary stating that at times some courts do show misplaced sympathy for accused, which rather proves to be counter-productive.

On fundamental rights of a person under the constitution, the high court observed that “for enjoying such right and protection, the act and conduct of a person should be clear and clean and not shady and doubtful”.

The court added that while deciding on bail pleas, courts have to keep in view the ground reality that police of the region is not much trained in scientific investigation and necessary resources and infrastructure for collecting other evidence are limited.

“The custodial interrogation is much more effective and productive since no person of average intelligence, who is under the protective umbrella of prearrest bail, would utter even a single word, which may be read against him subsequently, and if custodial interrogation is denied, that would hamper the investigation,” it said, adding that while deciding on bails, petitioners past involvement in criminal cases too can be taken into consideration.