Noting discrepancy in description of recovered contraband, P&H HC raps Police Authorities for such callously casual approach towards their official duty

Read Order: Sandeep Kumar & Ors.  v. State of Punjab

Monika Rahar

Chandigarh, February 1,2022: The Punjab and Haryana High Court has expressed its deep concern and anguish over the manner in which the authorities dealt with a matter relating to the NDPS Act. 

The Court observed that without regard to the legal implications, in some parts of the Status Report, the Police Officials mentioned the name of intoxicant tables allegedly recovered from the accused, as ‘CLAVIDOL-100 SR’ whereas in others it was described as ‘CLOVIDOL-100 SR’, despite having the obligation of keeping themselves well versed with the same and of dealing with such like matters with utmost sincerity and caution. 

The Bench of Justice Meenakshi I. Mehta also added that said discrepancy reflected nothing else but their (Police’s) callously casual approach towards their official duty which is least expected from them because they are duty-bound to check the crime graph in the State especially in the circumstances when the drug menace has become deep-rooted and is taking its toll-like a slow poison for the young generation upon which every nation pins hopes for a bright and secure future. 

In this case, on receipt of secret information, the Police apprehended the three accused who were carrying multiple stripes of intoxicant tablets in different bags for the purpose of selling them in a village. The accused attributed the supply of the contraband concerned to petitioner-Sandeep Kumar and in pursuance thereof, he was apprehended and later, 1500 Clovidol 100-SR tablets (150 strips) and 600 white colour loose intoxicant tablets were recovered at his instance. He also suffered a disclosure statement, based on which petitioner- Amit Sharma @ Makhan was nabbed and on the strength of his (Amit Sharma) disclosure statement another recovery of  300 white colour loose intoxicant tablets was made. 

The petitioner-Sandeep Kumar moved an application before the Court below for claiming the statutory bail under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. while pleading that as per the FSL report, the afore-said 1500 tablets, as allegedly recovered from him, contained ‘Pregabalin’ which did not fall within the purview of NDPS Act and that the quantity of 600 loose tablets, reportedly containing ‘Tramadol Hydrochloride’ Salt was ‘non-commercial/intermediate’. 

Lastly, it was submitted that the Chargesheet was not presented in the Court within the stipulated period. The Special Court dismissed his application, thus he filed two petitions before the High Court impugning the said order of dismissal and for the grant of regular bail, respectively, whereas the third petition was filed by Amit Kumar for grant of bail. 

The Court observed at the outset that in some paragraphs in the Status-reports/Reply filed in these petitions, the labelled tablets, as were allegedly recovered from petitioner-Sandeep Kumar and his above-said three co-accused, were mentioned as ‘CLOVIDOL-100 SR’ tablets whereas, in certain other paras, the same was described as ‘CLAVIDOL100 SR’ tablets. Further, the Court noted that the second sample, as drawn/ separated out of the labelled/ packed tablets, allegedly recovered from petitioner-Sandeep Kumar, was sent to the FSL and as per the report received the same was found to be containing the salt ‘Pregabalin’ which concededly, did not fall within the ambit of the NDPS Act. 

Also, perusing the charge-sheet, the Court opined that the trial Court framed the charge against petitioners Sandeep and Amit Sharma @ Makhan under Section 22 of the Act only for their having been found in possession of 600 and 300 loose tablets, containing ‘Tramadol Hydrochloride’, respectively, while specifically mentioning that 1500 tablets containing Pregabalin, do not fall within the purview of the Act and the petitioners were not charge-sheeted under Section 29 of the Act meaning thereby that the Investigating Agency, in its own wisdom and also for the reasons best known to it, did not present the Challan against both the petitioners under the said provision, i.e Section 29 of the Act. 

As regards the bail plea of the petitioners, keeping in view the factum of the petitioners have been charge-sheeted under separate heads for the recovery of the said contraband, i.e loose intoxicant tablets, falling within the category of ‘non-commercial/ intermediate quantity’ and the period of their incarceration, the Court ordered the release of the petitioners on regular bail subject to their furnishing the requisite personal and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Trial Court. 

Lastly, before parting the Court also expressed how unpleasantly surprised it was to note that the Assistant Commissioner Drugs, Food & Drug Administration, (FDA) Punjab cancelled the permission, as granted to a pharmaceutical company to manufacture the formulations containing ‘Tramadol Hydrochloride’ salt including ‘CLAVIDOL 100-SR’ tablets, on account of the alleged contravention of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 and Rules 1945 by the said manufacturer, while further directing it to stop the manufacturing of all the drug formulations containing the said salt. 

However, the Court noted that as per the FSL reports, the ‘CLAVIDOL-100 SR’ tablets, i.e the tablets with the same brand name, as allegedly recovered in this case, contain ‘Pregabalin’. Thus, the Court opined that even if the use of the brand names was taken to be without the domain of the FDA, then also FDA was to ensure strict compliance of the relevant law/Rules for manufacturing of drugs. 

“The subsequent use of the same brand name, i.e ‘CLAVIDOL-100 SR’ by the above-said manufacturer for manufacturing the tablets containing a different salt is likely to lead to grave consequences as the same can result in serious health hazards for the patients as well as the public at large. It is only after this Court took notice of the said fact during the pendency of the instant petitions and required the said Department to explain the matter that the concerned authorities woke up from their deep slumber and issued the letter…to the afore-named manufacturer qua the cancellation of the permission granted to it for manufacturing the drug formulations containing Pregabalin”, the bench opined. 

Thus, while allowing the bail pleas, the Court concluded by saying that the conduct of the Authorities was highly deplorable and it spoke volumes of their questionable acts and omissions posing a serious challenge for the State in tackling the drug menace.