SC on Impact of Drugs: 'The Arc and Web of Drug Trade Cannot Be Permitted to Corrode the Shine of Youth', Read Judgment

The Supreme Court recently remarked, “The debilitating impact of drug trade and drug abuse is an immediate and serious concern for India,” stressing the alarming national security challenges associated with narcotics trafficking.

The Court further noted that the State has a duty to address the root causes of this crisis, emphasizing that the "arc and web of drug trade cannot be permitted to corrode the shine of the youth of India." The case before the Court involved a challenge to the cancellation of bail granted to a petitioner accused of narcotics and weapons trafficking, with connections to cross-border drug syndicates.

Petitioner in Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No.2819 of 2024 challenged the Punjab and Haryana High Court's order of 29.01.2024, which cancelled the bail granted to the petitioner in July 2021. The petitioner had been arrested in connection with FIR No.20/2020 for narcotics and weapons trafficking. Initially, he was granted bail, but further investigation revealed his involvement in another significant case related to the smuggling of over 500 kgs of heroin from Pakistan. The case was transferred to the National Investigation Agency (NIA) due to its ties to cross-border drug syndicates and terrorism.

In May 2023, the NIA sought the cancellation of the petitioner’s bail, citing expanded charges under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and the need for custodial interrogation. The High Court cancelled the bail, agreeing with the NIA’s position. The petitioner then challenged both the High Court's decision and the central government’s order transferring the investigation to the NIA, arguing that the NIA’s involvement was not warranted under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act.

The petitioner, represented by senior counsel Sri Siddhartha Dave, argued that the orders passed by the respondent (Annexures P-4, P-6, and P-9) are illegal and violate Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution. The petitioner claimed that offences under the NDPS Act (non-scheduled offences) were wrongly linked to Scheduled Offences under the UAPA via Section 8 of the NIA Act. The Central Government improperly invoked Section 8 to transfer the investigation of NDPS-related FIRs to the NIA, despite no connection between the petitioner and the Gujarat FIR under UAPA, which involved different accused.

The petitioner asserted that Section 8 should only be invoked when there is a direct link to a Scheduled Offence, which does not apply here. Furthermore, the petitioner argued that the High Court's decision to cancel bail at the NIA's request should be overturned. If the earlier orders are quashed, the bail should be reinstated, and the case should remain in Punjab for trial. The petitioner sought the quashing of the impugned orders and the revival of the earlier bail grant.

ASG Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, representing the respondent, argued that the writ petition is misconceived. The Central Government's order dated 29.06.2020 (Annexure P-4) was issued under Section 6(5) of the NIA Act, and the petitioner has no grounds to challenge it, as he was not named in FIR No. 1/2018. During the investigation of Scheduled Offences under the UAPA, a connection between the petitioner’s alleged offences and UAPA provisions was discovered, leading to the orders in Annexures P-6 and P-9 for NIA investigation.

It was submitted that the petitioner is said to be involved in a narco-terror network, linked to accused Simarjeet Singh Sandhu, and the NIA investigation uncovered this connection, justifying the invocation of UAPA Sections 17 and 18. The ASG also pointed out that Section 14 of the NIA Act allows the Special Court to try connected offences. Therefore, the NIA's investigation is lawful, and the petition should be dismissed. The ASG defends the High Court’s cancellation of the petitioner’s bail, stating that the decision was correct and warrants no interference.

The Court analyzed the scope of Section 8 of the NIA Act and its connection to the investigation of Scheduled Offences, stating that "under Section 6(5) of the NIA Act, the Central Government may direct the NIA to investigate Scheduled Offences, and the NIA can also investigate any other offence linked to these Scheduled Offences." The Court emphasized that "the expression 'the accused' in Section 8 of the NIA Act cannot be restricted in its meaning and connotation to only the accused in respect of whom investigation is being carried out pursuant to sub-sections (4) and (5) of Section 6 of the NIA Act in respect of a Scheduled Offence."

The Court highlighted the broader objective of the NIA Act, observing that "the Act revolves around effective investigation of Scheduled Offences," not the accused, and reaffirmed that Section 8 is designed to define the scope of offences the NIA can investigate, irrespective of the accused's identity.

It noted the statutory intent behind Section 6(6) and Section 8, rejecting a restrictive reading of Section 8, and reaffirmed that the NIA has the authority to investigate connected non-scheduled offences. The Court also acknowledged the gravity of the offences, especially as seen in Annexure P-4, where the Gujarat ATS had seized heroin worth approximately Rs. 15 crore, leading to the NIA’s involvement.

The Court affirmed the NIA's actions regarding FIR Nos. 20/2020, 23/2020, and 01/2018, observing "tcasehere is a connection, nexus and a link which has been brought out between the Scheduled Offences investigated by the NIA under Sections 17 and 18 of UAPA" and the NDPS Act.

The Court also upheld the NIA's request for the cancellation of the petitioner's bail, stating, "the NIA was justified in seeking cancellation of bail granted to the petitioner herein."

The Court expressed deep concern about the impact of drug abuse on national security, stating, "The debilitating impact of drug trade and drug abuse is an immediate and serious concern for India," and stressed that "The State has a responsibility to address the root causes of this predicament," urging collective action to tackle the issue. It concluded with a strong reminder: "The arc and web of drug trade cannot be permitted to corrode the shine of the youth of India!"

The Court dismissed the writ petition, finding that the orders invoking NIA's powers under Sections 6(5) and 8 were lawful. It held that the NIA had the authority to investigate the connected offences under the NDPS Act and UAPA, as there was a clear nexus between the offences. The Court upheld the cancellation of the petitioner’s bail, agreeing with the NIA's request due to the ongoing investigation and transfer of trial.

Picture Source : https://pixnio.com/free-images/science/medical-science/drug-paraphernalia-were-a-number-of-red-oblong-tablets-rows-or-lines-725x483.jpg