T.S.THAKUR, KURIAN JOSEPH, JJ. - (1.) When this appeal came up for hearing before us on 11th April, 2012, it was contended by learned counsel for the appellant -Union of India that Standing Order No.1 of 1989 dated 13th June, 1989 which prescribes the procedure to be followed for seizure, sampling, safe keeping and disposal of the seized Drugs, Narcotics and Psychotropic substances is being followed throughout the country. It was also contended that Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Government of India, has in terms of a Circular dated 23rd February, 2011 impressed upon the Chief Secretaries and the concerned police heads of the State Governments to ensure that instructions given and the procedure prescribed in the Standing Order aforementioned was strictly adhered to. These submissions notwithstanding, doubts about the procedure being actually followed persisted. Pilferage of the contraband goods and their return to the market place for circulation being a major hazard, this Court appointed Mr. Ajit Kumar Sinha, Senior Advocate, as Amicus Curiae, with a view to making a realistic review of the procedure for search, disposal or destruction of the narcotics and the remedial steps that need to be taken to plug the loopholes, if any.
(2.) On 3rd July, 2012 this Court after hearing the Amicus Curiae prima facie came to the conclusion that the procedure prescribed for the destruction of the contraband seized in different States was not being followed resulting in a very piquant situation in which accumulation of huge quantities of the seized drugs and narcotics has increased manifold the chances of their pilferage for re -circulation in the market. This Court also noted a report published in the timesofindia.indiatimes.com under the heading "Bathinda's police stores bursting at seams with seized narcotics" from which it appeared that large quantities of seized drugs had accumulated over the years including opium, poppy husk, charas etc. apart from modern narcotic substances. The report suggested that 39 lakhs sedatives and narcotic tablets, 1.10 lakhs capsules, over 21,000 drug syrups and 1828 sedative injections apart from 8 kgs. of smack and 84 kgs. of ganja were awaiting disposal in Bathinda Police stores alone. The position was, according to Mr. Sinha, no better in other States especially those situate along the international borders. It was argued by the Amicus Curiae that without proper data from the authorities concerned, it was not possible to take stock of the magnitude of the problem no matter challenges posed by rampant drug abuse had acquired alarming proportions affecting the youth, some of whom are driven to commission of crimes on account of deleterious effects of drug abuse.
(3.) It was in the above backdrop that by an order dated 3rd July, 2012 passed in Criminal Appeal No.652 of 2012 this Court directed collection of information from the police heads of each one of the States through the Chief Secretaries concerned in regard to seizure, storage, disposal and destruction of the seized contraband and judicial supervision over the same. Specific queries were formulated in the order passed by us with a direction to the Chief Secretaries of the States concerned to serve the same upon the Directors General of Police for a report to be forwarded through the Registrars General of the High Courts of the States concerned who were appointed Nodal Officers for that purpose. Registrars General were also asked to independently secure from the District and Sessions Judges concerned in their respective States, answers to the queries specified under the head "Judicial Supervision". Chiefs of Central Government Agencies viz. Narcotics Control Bureau, Central Bureau of Narcotics, Directorate General of Revenue Intelligence and Commissionerates of Customs & Central Excise including the Indian Coast Guard were directed to issue similar queries to the officers concerned and to submit their respective reports detailing the information required in terms of the orders passed by this Court. The queries raised by this Court were in the following words: "12.1. Seizure (i) What narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances (natural and synthetic) have been seized in the last 10 years and in what quantity. Provide yearwise and districtwise details of the seizure made by the relevant authority. (ii) What are the steps, if any, taken by the seizing authorities to prevent damage, loss and pilferage of the narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances (natural and synthetic) during seizure/transit. (iii) What are the circulars/notifications/directions/guidelines, if any, issued to competent officers to follow any specific procedure in regard to seizure of contrabands, their storage and destruction. Copies of the same be attached to the report. 12.2. Storage (i) Is there any specified/notified store for storage of the seized contraband in a State, if so, is the storage space available in each district or taluka. (ii) If a store/storage space is not available in each district or taluka, where is the contraband sent for storage purposes. Under what conditions is withdrawal of the contraband permissible and whether a court order is obtained for such withdrawal. (iii) What are the steps taken at the time of storage to determine the nature and quantity of the substance being stored and what are the measures taken to prevent substitution and pilferage from the stores. (iv) Is there any check stock register maintained at the site of storage and if so, by whom. Is there any periodical check of such register. If so, by whom. Is any record regarding such periodic inspection maintained and in what form. (v) What is the condition of the storage facilities at present. Is there any shortage of space or any other infrastructure lacking. What steps have been taken or are being taken to remove the deficiencies, if any. (vi) Have any circulars/notifications/directions/guidelines been issued to competent officers for care and caution to be exercised during storage. If so, a copy of the same be produced. 12.3. Disposal/Destruction (i) What narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances (natural and synthetic) have been destroyed in the last 10 years and in what quantity. Provide yearwise and districtwise details of the destruction made by the relevant authority. If no destruction has taken place, the reason therefor. (ii) Who is authorised to apply for permission of the court to destroy the seized contraband. Has there been any failure or dereliction in making such applications. Whether any person having technical knowledge of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances (natural and synthetic) is associated with the actual process of destruction of the contraband. (iii) Was any action taken against the person who should have applied for permission to destroy the drugs or should have destroyed and did not do so. (iv) What are the steps taken at the time of destruction to determine the nature and quantity of the substance being destroyed. (v) What are the steps taken by competent authorities to prevent damage, loss, pilferage and tampering/substitution of the narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances (natural and synthetic) during transit from point of storage to point of destruction. (vi) Is there any specified facility for destruction of contraband in the State. If so, a list of such facilities along with location and details of maintenance, conditions and supervisory bodies be provided. (vii) If a facility is not available, where is the contraband sent for destruction purposes. Under whose supervision and what is the entire procedure thereof. (viii) Is any record, electronic or otherwise prepared at the site of destruction of the contraband and by whom. Is there any periodical check of such record. What are the ranks/designation of the supervising officers charged with keeping a check on the same. 12.4. Judicial supervision (i) Is any inspection done by the District and Sessions Judge of the store where the seized drugs are kept. If drugs are lying in the store, has the Sessions Judge taken steps to have them destroyed. (ii) Is any report of the inspection conducted, submitted to the Administrative Judge of the High Court or the Registry of the High Court. If so, has any action on the subject being taken for timely inspection and destruction of the drugs. (iii) Are there any pending applications for destruction of drugs in the district concerned, if so, what is the reason for the delay in the disposal of such application. (iv) What level officers including the judicial officers are associated with the process of destruction. (v) At what stages are the Magistrates/judicial officers/any other officer of the court associated with seizure/storage/destruction of drugs. (vi) Are there any rules framed by the Court regarding its supervisory role in enforcement of the NDPS Act as regards seizure/storage/destruction of drugs. (vii) What is the average time for completion of trial of NDPS matters - ;