"GO AFTER THE BIG FISH RATHER THAN CONSUMERS"
In a candid conversation, Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) director general Satya Narayan Pradhan tells Group Editorial Director Raj Chengappa about his agency’s decision to not press charges against Aryan Khan, and the need to reform the system. Excerpts:
Q. After such a high-profile arrest, why did NCB drop charges against Aryan Khan and five others?
Essentially, there must be direct criminal liability, we cannot construct liabilities without physical and corroborative evidence. Already, the courts have been very strong on the rebound in cases where liability is constructed out of thin air and some speculative aspect creeps into the investigation. We didn’t want any speculative aspect, we wanted every evidence, every accusation, to be anchored in evidence, solid evidence. We extended it to the principle underlined by the Supreme Court, of evidence being beyond reasonable doubt. Those six, including Aryan Khan, could not have been chargesheeted as there was not a shred of evidence beyond reasonable doubt to indict them. Nor was there any possibility to anchor it to any physical or corroborative evidence.
Q. What finally convinced you to take this action?
It was a combination of professionalism and legal principles, not an emotional decision. If NCB does not set standards and the threshold for how to take care of victims, no one will. I was clear that even if we have to take flak for the NCB’s decision, it would be worth it, because at least we would be on the straight and narrow path of legal principles.
Q. Has the NCB’s reputation taken a beating because of this episode?
If you must bring back a modicum of professionalism into an organisation, it is imperative to do a course correction. Had it not been for the names involved, the Mumbai case would have been an ordinary one. We are not here to go after small cases. We should not go around catching paanwala peddlers. Our job is to catch the big fish such as cartels that operate panIndia, or even international cartels. So, I have issued orders that the NCB should avoid petty cases and focus only on the big cartels and peddlers.
Q. Do we need to revisit the NDPS Act, which treats consumers as criminals rather than addicts who need medical help?
There is serious thinking at the highest level about reforming the NDPS Act. As of now, all I can share is that there is a broad consensus that something should be done to decriminalise consumption. But the consensus is a little nuanced, so there are different opinions on how to go about it. That
there is a need to decriminalise it because of the cultural and medical issues involved. The NCB’s stand is that it should be a graded response, where at least some case should be registered and there should be a system of graded warning rather than total decriminalisation. A roadmap should also be drawn, which could include setting up a panIndia rehabilitation network.
Q. What other big lessons does the Aryan Khan case hold for the NCB and other stakeholders?
There are lessons on either side, for both the consumers of drugs and for those looking into the socalled crime of drug consumption or peddling. For the first, I would say, there is a need for universal recognition by parents, teachers and guardians that drugs are more common than we care to admit. And it [the menace] is spreading at nautical speed. Parents across India may not be privy to what is happening to their children when it comes to drugs exposure and consumption. The worry is that we are now concocting drugs in India at unprecedented levels, including mixing synthetic drugs. When you have 80 to 100 million drug addicts or potential drug addicts, then we have a cancerous problem and must do something about it. The first step is at the societal level, to become aware of and recognise the problem.
Q. What changes do agencies like the NCB need to make in the way they handle such cases?
NDPS being a stringent act doubles our responsibility. Because you can incarcerate innocent people if your investigation is not professional. You could do serious damage to a lot of lives, as most of those arrested would be in their early 20s or 30s or even younger. So, we need to upgrade our investigation processes and rigour, otherwise we are doing a disservice to our own mandate and to society.
Q. Are state police organisations up to handling narcotics cases?
Narcotics investigation is not a priority for the state police as of now. They have enough excuses to say they don’t have time enough from law and order and general crimes of murder and dacoity. It is high time that the state police mainstream the fight against narcotics because it is the mother of all crimes—the money comes from here, even trafficking in arms and humans is fed through the economics of drugs smuggling. I don’t hesitate to say that the state police and the agencies dedicated to narcotics investigation are probably not trained well enough or adapt well enough to handle these cases professionally. And that is of serious concern. ■