Madras High Court Quashes Conviction in NDPS Case, Orders Compensation and Inquiry Against Police Officers

Court Sets Aside Conviction Based on Co-Accused Confession, Awards Rs. 10 Lakhs Compensation for False Prosecution

In a significant judgment, the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court, presided over by Justice K.K. Ramakrishnan, has overturned the conviction of A. Vignesh, who was previously sentenced to 10 years of rigorous imprisonment under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (NDPS Act). The court found that the conviction, which was largely based on the confession of a co-accused, lacked independent evidence and thus was not legally sustainable.

The case originated from an incident on June 26, 2021, when police intercepted Vignesh and others, recovering 24 kg of Ganja. However, the prosecution's reliance on the co-accused's confession and the absence of corroborative evidence raised doubts about Vignesh's involvement. The court noted that no contraband was directly recovered from Vignesh, and his signature was notably absent from the recovery mahazar.

The judgment emphasized the mandatory compliance with Section 42 of the NDPS Act, highlighting failures in the procedural aspects of the investigation. Justice Ramakrishnan criticized the police for not producing the original handwritten information and relying on a typed copy without authenticity. The court concluded that this procedural lapse invalidated the prosecution's case.

In a stern rebuke, the court ordered an inquiry against the police officials involved, namely P.W.2, P.W.3, and P.W.4, for allegedly giving false evidence. The Director General of Police, Chennai, has been directed to conduct this inquiry within a month, ensuring a fair and unbiased process.

Furthermore, acknowledging the wrongful prosecution, the court awarded a compensation of Rs. 10 lakhs to Vignesh, payable by the responsible police officers. This decision underscores the judiciary's commitment to upholding the fundamental right to a fair investigation and trial.

The High Court's ruling not only acquits Vignesh but also mandates the refund of the fine imposed during the trial. This case serves as a critical reminder of the importance of adhering to legal protocols and the judiciary's role in safeguarding individual rights against unjust prosecution.

Bottom Line:

NDPS Act - Conviction based solely on the confession of co-accused is not legally sustainable - Absence of independent evidence or recovery from the accused creates doubt regarding his involvement - Compliance with Section 42 of NDPS Act is mandatory and failure to do so invalidates prosecution case - Court orders compensation for false prosecution and directs enquiry against police officials involved.

Statutory provision(s): Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Section 8(c), Section 20(b)(ii)(C), Section 42; Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 357; Fundamental Rights - Right to Fair Investigation and Trial

A. Vignesh v. State, (Madras)(Madurai Bench) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2799480