Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + HC Customs - 2001 (3) TMI HC This

  • Login
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2001 (3) TMI 1065 - HC - Customs

Issues:
1. Whether the Investigation Officer filing a complaint under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (N.D.P.S. Act) should be a higher official than the detecting officer.
2. Whether the detecting officer and investigating officer can be the same person.

Issue 1:
The judgment referred to previous decisions in Naushad v. State of Kerala and Xavier v. State of Kerala to analyze the necessity of a higher-ranking officer conducting investigations in N.D.P.S. Act cases. The court examined the principle that a police officer detecting a crime should not necessarily be investigated by a superior officer, especially in cases under S. 51(a) of the Kerala Police Act. The court concluded that the decision in Xavier's case did not apply to N.D.P.S. Act cases and that the legal position stated in Naushad's case was overruled.

Issue 2:
The court discussed the role of the investigating officer in N.D.P.S. Act cases, citing the Rajasthan High Court's decision in Gyan Chand v. State of Rajasthan and the Supreme Court's decision in Megha Singh v. State of Haryana. The court emphasized the importance of fair and impartial investigations, highlighting instances where a police officer who detected a crime proceeded with the investigation, leading to prejudice. However, the court also referenced State of Punjab v. Balbir Singh, confirming that the empowered officer who seized the article under the N.D.P.S. Act could proceed with the investigation, contrary to the opinion in Johnson v. State of Kerala. The court held that there should not be a separate investigating officer in such cases, and the detecting officer could continue with the investigation.

Conclusion:
The court concluded that in N.D.P.S. Act cases, the detecting officer could also be the investigating officer without vitiating the proceedings, as long as there was no specific prejudice to the accused. The legal position stated in Naushad's case was overruled, and the judgment was disposed of as the term of imprisonment had already been served.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates