Court emphasizes necessity of custodial interrogation to unravel larger narcotics network.
In a significant decision, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has denied anticipatory bail to Javed Khan, who is alleged to be a key supplier in a drug trafficking case involving a commercial quantity of contraband. The judgment, delivered by Justice Sumeet Goel, underscores the critical need for custodial interrogation to effectively probe the broader narcotics network and ensure a comprehensive investigation.
The case, registered under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, 1985, pertains to the recovery of 200 kilograms and 510 grams of poppy husk from a vehicle intercepted by the police at a checkpoint in Ellenabad, Haryana. The vehicle's driver, along with other co-accused, named Javed Khan as the supplier of the contraband, leading to his implication in the case.
Javed Khan's counsel contended that his client was falsely implicated and that the prosecution's case rested solely on the uncorroborated disclosure statements of co-accused, which he argued were inadmissible. However, the state counsel opposed the bail plea, highlighting the gravity of the allegations and Khan's alleged involvement in a well-organized drug trafficking network.
Justice Goel, in his judgment, noted that the allegations against Khan were serious and substantiated by prima facie evidence of his involvement in the drug supply chain. The court acknowledged the importance of custodial interrogation to trace the origin and network of the contraband and emphasized that granting anticipatory bail could impede the investigation process.
The court also referenced the Supreme Court's observations in State v. Anil Sharma, underscoring that custodial interrogation is crucial for obtaining concealed information and that anticipatory bail could hinder effective investigation. The judgment reflects the court's commitment to balancing individual rights with societal interests, particularly in cases involving grave offenses like drug trafficking.
The decision comes at a time when the judiciary is increasingly focusing on curbing the menace of drug trafficking and ensuring thorough investigations into organized crime networks. The dismissal of the anticipatory bail plea signifies the judiciary's stance on maintaining the integrity of ongoing investigations and preventing potential tampering with evidence.
Bottom Line:
Anticipatory bail cannot be granted when there are serious allegations of involvement in commercial quantity drug trafficking, as custodial interrogation is necessary to unearth the broader conspiracy and trace the network involved.
Statutory provision(s): Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, 1985, Sections 15(c), 29, 37; Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, Section 482.
Javed Khan v. State of Haryana, (Punjab And Haryana) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2843430
