SC reverses high court order on bail to 25 drug convicts

DIRECTS PUNJAB TO TAKE CONVICTS IN CUSTODY; ASKS HC TO EXPEDITE HEARINGS ON APPEALS FILED BY THEM

The Supreme Court (SC) has reversed Punjab and Haryana high court order of January 2018 suspending jail term and granting bail to 25 persons convicted by different trial courts in Punjab for possession of commercial quantity of drugs.

The SC bench presided over by justice NV Ramana directed Punjab to take the convicts in custody and asked the high court to expedite hearings on the appeals filed by these convicts.

In January 2018, an HC acting on 25 pleas of suspension of sentence filed by these convicts submitting that since adjudication before the high court would take some time, said jail term awarded to them should be suspended and they be released on bail. While allowing bails to convicts, the HC had observed that manufactured drugs, be it containing narcotics or psychotropic substances, if manufactured by a manufacturer, must be tried under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940, and not under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, except those in loose form by way of powder, liquid etc.

The jail term under NDPS Act is 10 years or more, while under Cosmetics Act, it is less than three. The convicts were given 10 years or more jail by trial courts. Punjab had appealed against the January order arguing that a person arrested for possessing bulk quantity of manufactured drug can be tried under both the Acts.

The SC said high court erroneously made observations as to under which law they should be tried. NDPS Act should not be read in exclusion to Drugs and Cosmetics Act, and it is the state’s prerogative under which law an offender is prosecuted, SC said, adding that in the present case, since the action of the accused amounted to a prima facie violation of Section 8 of the NDPS Act, they were charged under Section 22 of NDPS Act (carrying psychotropic substances).

Section 8 provides for manufacturing, possession of any narcotic drug as per permits given by the state. SC said Section 80 of the Act lays down that application of the drugs and Cosmetics Act is not barred, and provisions of the NDPS Act can be applicable in addition to that of the provisions of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act. Provisions of NDPS Act are not in derogation of Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940, SC said.