2017 (2) TMI 471 - SC - Customs

Narcotics laboratories - Re-testing provisions - it is imperative to define re-testing rights, if at all, as an amalgamation of the above-stated factors. Further, in light of Section 52-A of the NDPS Act, which permits swift disposal of some hazardous substances, the time frame within which any application for re-testing may be permitted ought to be strictly defined. - Decision in the matter of Thana Singh Vs. Central Bureau of Narcotics 2013 (1) TMI 590 - SUPREME COURT followed

Summary

Issues:
1. Access to narcotics laboratories under the NDPS Act.
2. Establishment of forensic science laboratories at state and regional levels.
3. Adequate employment and resources for forensic science laboratories.
4. Standardization of equipment across forensic laboratories.
5. Vacancies in CFSLs and the need for addressing staff shortages.
6. Provisions for re-testing under the NDPS Act.

Access to Narcotics Laboratories:
The Supreme Court emphasized the importance of narcotics laboratories in identifying drugs for abuse, determining purity, and supporting drug trafficking cases. It highlighted the need for equal access to Central Forensic Science Laboratories (CFSLs) across the country and directed the establishment of more CFSLs to cater to all regions effectively. Similar directions were issued to states to set up state and regional forensic science laboratories based on case backlogs.

Adequate Resources for Laboratories:
Authorities were directed to ensure the employment of technical staff and provision of facilities for efficient laboratory operations. The timely submission of reports to relevant agencies was stressed to enhance the effectiveness of forensic science laboratories.

Standardization of Equipment:
The Directorate of Forensic Science Services was instructed to standardize equipment across forensic laboratories to ensure consistent and reliable results, preventing challenges to test outcomes based on equipment discrepancies.

Staff Vacancies and Re-testing Provisions:
Concerns were raised regarding staff shortages at CFSLs and the need to address these shortages promptly. Additionally, the judgment discussed the trend of re-testing and re-sampling in NDPS courts, highlighting the impermissible import of rights from other legislations without accompanying restrictions. The need to define re-testing rights within a specific timeframe was emphasized to streamline trial processes effectively.

Conclusion:
The Supreme Court disposed of the writ petition, stating that the prayer made had been adequately addressed and did not require reconsideration. The judgment underscored the crucial aspects of access to laboratories, resource allocation, equipment standardization, staff shortages, and re-testing provisions under the NDPS Act, aiming to enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of forensic science operations in the country.