UNION OF INDIA v. MOHANLAL & Anr.

relation to which the trial of the accused persons has finally concluded and the proceedings have attained finality at all levels in the judicial hierarchy. The DDCs shall then take steps to have such stock also destroyed under the direct supervision of the head of the Department concerned. In the cases in which the proceedings are still pending before the Courts at the level of trial court, appellate court or before the Supreme Court, the heads of the Department concerned shall ensure that appropriate applications are moved by the officers competent to do so under Notification dated 16" January, 2015 before the Drugs Disposal Committees concerned and steps for disposal of such Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic and controlled Substances and Conveyances taken without any further loss of time. [Para 19] [693-i<; 694-A-D, F-H; 695-A)

The Chief Justices of the High Courts concerned are requested to appoint a Committee. of Judges on administrative side to supervise and monitor progress made by the respective States in regard to the compliance with the above directions and wherever necessary, to issue appropriate directions for a speedy action on the administrative and even on the judicial side in public interest wherever considered necessary. [Para 21] (696-B) CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal No. 652 of2012 From the Judgment and Order dated 05.01.2010 of the High Court ofM. P. in Criminal Appeal No. 193 of2008. Ranjit Kumar, SG, Ajit Kumar Sinha, (A.C.), A. K. Panda, Binu Tamta, Sushma Manchanda, Pravesh Thakur, Manish Vashishtha, D.S. Mahra, Shreekant N. Terdal for the Appellant. Sharwan Dogra, Adv. Gen., Suryanarayana Singh, Sr. Addi. Adv. Gen., Gopal Singh, Rituraj Biswas, Sibo Sankar Mishra, Niranjan Sahu, Pardeep Kumar (for Corporate Law Group), Hemantika Wahi, Jesal Wahi, Preetika Dwivedi, Abhinav Mukerji, Ravi Prakash Mehrotra, Sanjay Sharawat for the Respondents.

On 3" 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 modem 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 bprders. 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.

It was in the above backdrop that by an order dated 3'' July, 2012 passed in Criminal Appeal No.652 of 2012 this Court directed A B c D E F G H 660 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2016] I S.C.R. A B c D E F 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 forwardf:d 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 lndian 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.J. Seizure (i) What narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances (natural and synthetic) have been seized in the last JO 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. G

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 ta/uka? (ii) If a store/storage space is not available in each district or taluka, where is the contraband sent for storage purposes? H UNION OF INDIA v. MOHANLAL [T. S. THAKUR, CJ!.] 661 Under what conditions is withdrawal of the contraband permissible ani whether a court order is obtained for such withdrawal? A (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? Ifso, 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 JO 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? B c D E F G (iv) What are the steps taken at the time of destruction to determine the nature and quantity of the substance being H 662 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2016] I S.C.R. A destroyed? (v) What are the steps taken by competent alllhorities 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 othen<•ise 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) JS 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? B c D E F G H UNION OF INDIA v. MOHANLAL [T. S. THAKUR, CJ!.] 663 (vi) Are there any rules framed by the Court regarding its A 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?"

4. In compliance with the above directions, reports have been submitted by all the States except the States of Arunachal Pradesh, Jammu and Kashmir, Dadar & Nagar Haveli, Lakshadweep, Nagaland and Pondicherry. From a perusal of the reports so received the position that emerges in regard to disposal/destruction of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substance qua each State· for the last I 0 years may be summarised as under: DETAILS OF SEIZURE AND DISPOSAL OF DRUGS (STATEWISE) I. ANDHRA PRADESH Item . Ganja Total Quanti!x Tgtal Quantity Difference Seized years) 2,20,977.191 Kg !!~strayed (in 10 vears\ 39I0.70 Kg (In 10

217066.491 kg (98.23%) B c D Opium

22.925 kg Charas

6.5 kg Cocaine

851.0% kg _ Others '·

85.125 kg+ 103 Capsules + 81 Injections 26 Amp 0 0 0 0

22.925 Kg (I 00%) E

6.5 kg (JOO%)

851.096 kg (I 00%) ASSAM

2. (The Information pertains only to the period of 2010-2012) Item Total Quanti!l: Total Quantitv Difference Seiz eel (In 10 Destrol'.ecl years) 10:1'.ears} (in Ganja

203.54 Kg 136Kg

67.54 (33.18%) F G H 664 A SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2016] I S.C.R. Heroin .614 kg 0 Opium Others 30gms 755662 0 41472 Nos. .214 Kg (34.853%) 30 !!!TIS {I 00%) 714190Nos. (94.5%) B

3. BIHAR Item Ganja Total Quanti!l: Total Quantitt Difference Seized (!n 10 Destrol'.ed vears) lOvears) 45Kg 0 45 kg (in Heroin

3.74 kg Charas

48.853 kg 100 kgs Poppy Straws Methqu 1676 kgs 0 0 0 0

3.74 kg

48.853 kg 100 kgs 1676 kgs Note:- No destruction of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances have taken place at Patna zonal unit.

4. CHHATTISGARH .!W!!. Ganja Cannabis Plants Brown Sugar Opium Opium Ponov Plant Green Opium Plant Total Quantit~ Total Quant it~ Di[ference IO Destroyed (in 10 Seized years) years) (In 1,03.622.140 kg Kg 52478 (Nos)

3281.570 kg 380 (Nos)

3.120 kg

1.460 kg 1558 pieces 3600 kg 0 0 0 0 1,00,340 .57 (96.77%) 52098 (Nos) (92.7%) 3.129 kg ( 100%)

1.460 kg ( 100%) 1558 pieces (100%) 3600 kg ( 100%) c D E F G H UNION OF !NOIA v. MOHANLAL [T. S. THAKUR, CJ!.] 665

CUSTOMS AND CENTRAL EXCISE Item Opium Total Quantity Total Quantity Difference Seized (!n 10 Destroyed vears) 10 years) 658.525 kg 367.007kg (in Destroyed more than seized Morphine

58.393 kg Heroine

1658.099 kg 190 kg+ 88930 58.203 kg Pcs lni ections 739.687 kg Ganja

484124.056 kg 8,43,008.559 Hashish

77350.076 kg

12298.578 kg Cocaine

640.569 kg 0

CHANDIGARH Item Total Quantity Total Quantity Difference Seized (!n 10 Destroyed lOvearsl vears\ 900.179 Kgs (in 2305 .444 Kgs (71%) Contraband By relevant authorities 3205.623 Kgs 58.393 kg Morphine Heroine

1658.099 kg Ganja

484124.056 kg \ 90kg + 88930 Pcs Iniections 739.687 kg 8,43,008.559 Hashish

77350.076 kg

12298.578 kg Cocaine

640.569 kg 0 (99.6%) 918.412kg (55.3%) Destroyed more than seized Destroyed more than seized 640.569 kg (100%)

58.203 kg (99.6%) 918.412 kg (55.3%) Destroyed more than seized Destroyed more than seized 640.569 kg (l 00"/o) A B c D E F G H 666 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2016] l S.C.R. A

DELHI • Delhi has provided two responses. One response has been provided by the NCB, Delhi and the other by the police heads of each of the district. • The response by NCB, Delhi is as follows:- Item Contraband Total Quantity Total Quantity Difference Seized vears\ 8891.8373 (In 10 Destroyed 10 vears\ 680.376 kg (in

8211.4613 kg(92.34%) • The Response by the police heads are as follows:- I2tal Quagtijy ~ized (In IQ years) By authorities 52944.577 kg relevant Il!tal Quantijy Qiffui:nce De~tr2yi:d (in 10 years}

32443.456 kg

20500.601 (38.72%) 1020669 0 1020669 (100%) Contraband (Hashish, Cocaine, Ganja, Heroin etc.) Contrabands (Chemical Substances in Tablets, lniections) DAMAN AND DIU

The UT Daman and Diu has informed the Total quantity by way of a detailed chart: lli.!!!. Contraband Total Quantity Total Quanti!Y Difference Seized (In 10 Destroyed 10 l'.earsj ll.!Wl By authorities 25.827 kgs relevant 000 kgs (in

25.827 Kgs (100%) B c D E F G H UNION OF INDIA v. MOHANLAL [T. S. THAKUR, CJ!.] 667 9 . Item Contraband DIRECTORATE OF REVENUE INTELLIGENCE Quantitv Total Quanti~ Difference {!n 10 Destroyed {in Total Sei:red years) By relevant 10 years} authorities 174185.687kg

2859.448 Kg

171326.23 9 198.3%) GUJARAT

• The Response of the state is divided into two parts. •One has been provided by the office of the Ministry of Home Affairs. • As per the said response the total amount of contraband seized in 10 years are 28340.047 Kg. No division of the type has been provided. • The total destruction in the last IO years however is only 132.375 Kg • The total amount of Contraband sti II in custody of the atrthorities is

28207.672 Kgs, i.e. 99.53% of the seized amount. •The response of the NCB Zonal Unit is as follows: Item Charas Total Quantity Total Ouantitv Difference Seized {!n 10 Destroyed {in vearS\ 1421.14 kg 10 vearsl 15.056 kgs Opium

17.505 kg Brown Sugar 2.03 kg Heroin

3.066 kg Others

3766.126 kg+ 299 ltrs. + 1022 Tablets 0 0 0 (981 gms of Heroin was destroyed in 2000, however all the seizures have been made oost2003) 525 kgs

1406.084 kg (98.9%) 17.505 kg ( 100%) 2.03 kg ( 100%) 3.066 kg (100%)

3241.126 kgs (86.05%) + 229 ltrs ( 100%)+ 1022 Tablets ( 100%) A B c D E F G H 668 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2016] I S.C.R. A B GOA

The UT Chandigarh has informed the Total quantity by way.of a detailed chart: Item !}n 10 Destro:i:ed {in By 10 :i:ears} Total Quantit:i: Total Quantit:i: Difference Seized :i:ears) relevant authorities 548.746 kg.>. 000 kgs

548.7476 kgs ( 100"/o) Contraband c

Item HARYANA Total Quantit:i: Total Quantit:i: Difference Seized {In 10 Destro:i:ed {in vears\ 2604.077 kg 10 vears\ 521.133 kg

2082.944 kg (79%) Ganja D E Charas 7252513 kg

533.46 kg Opium 1086387 kg

1972.860 Smack

8200.00 kg

4169.919 kg Heroine

1.046 kg

1.300 kg F Brown Sugar 2.001 kg

1.003 kg Cocaine 325 kg 0

6719.053 kg (92.64%) Destroyed more than seized 4030.081 kg (49.14%) Destroyed more than seized 998 kg ( 49.87°/o) .325 kg ( 100%\ HIMAO-IALPRADESH

1l1e State of Himachal Pradesh has infom1ed the Total quantity b iyway o a etai e c 1art: Item 'l d 1 f d (In 10 Destro:i:ed {in TQl:al Quantit:i: Total Quantitx Differenci: Seized vears\ 17026.714 10 vears) 1856.913

15169.801 (89.09%) Contraband G H UNION OF INDIA v. MOHANLAL [T. S. THAKUR, CJI.] 669

360.59 kg (100%) l.576 kg (100%) 546 kg (100%) JHARKHAND 14 Item (in Total Quantity Total Q!!antity Difference Seized vears) 1793.381 kg (In 10 Destro:i:ed lOyears} 0 (area of cultivation has been destroved) 0

1793.381 kg (100%)

360.59 kg Ganja Opium Brown Sugar

1.576 kg Heroine 546 kg 0 0

KERALA Item Total Quanti!}: Total Quanti!l; Difference Seized {In years} 10 Destro:i:ed 10 years) {in Ganja

7588.543 Kg

2740.926 kg Heroine .536 kg Hashish

12.368 kg Char as .063 kg 0 0 0 Brown Sugar

8.432 kg

12.058 kg Opium

23.697 kg 0

4847.617kg (63.88%) .536 kg (100%) 12.368 (100%) .063 kg (100%) Destroyed more than seized 23.697 kg (100%) KARNATAKA

• The state of Karnataka divided its response in two parts. One is seizure by Police and the Other is seizure by NCB Item Contraband {in Total Quanti!Y Total QuantiJx Difference Seized {In 10 Destro:i:ed 10 vears) vears) ByNCB 366.838 Kgs By relevant authorities 27291.633 Kl!S

366.838 Kgs(l00%) 15151.041 (55%)

12140.592 OOOkgs A B c D E F G H 670 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2016) I S.C.R. A

Item MAHARASHTRA Total Quanti!Y Total Quanti!Y Difference Seized vearsl 1,14.082 kg IO Destroyed 10 vearsl 8750 kg (In (in . Ganja B Heroin 654 kg 228 kg Charas

2364.\XJ kg

471.735 Opium

613.044 kg

47.135 kg c Cocaine

11.049 kg 0 kg 18 MANIPUR 1,14,074 kg (92.33%) 426 kg (65.13%) 1893.165 (80.05%) 565.909 kg (92.31%) 11.049 kg (100%) E Opium

233.985 kg D Item Heroin Ganja Total Quantity Total Quanti!l' Difference Seized years) (In 10 Destro:yed 10 :years} (in

37.534 kg.

12.498 kg

45343.25kg

41963.389 kg (Kindly reter to the Notel 0

25.036 kg (66.072%) 3379.861 kg (7.45%)

233.985 kg (100%) 3.05 kg(I00%) 0

3.05 kg Hashish Note: The Total amount of Ganja seized post 2005 was 25913.225 kgs and the same is still lying with the authorities since the last pretrial disposal in 2005. 19. MADHYA PRADESH • is seizure by Police and the other is seizure by NCB. Madhya Pradesh has divided its response in two pat1s. One Item Contraband {!n IO Destroi;~ (in lO m Ki:s Tutal Quanti!Y Total Quantity Difference Seized vears) In Kus By Police- 004376.528 vears) In Kus By Police 61384.805 BYNCB 348 kg By Police- 742991.723 Kgs (92%) Destroyed more than seized F G H UNION OF INDIA v. MOHANLAL [T. S. THAKUR, CJ!.] 671

Ministr of Home Affairs NCB Item Total Quantity Total Quan tit)'. Difference Seized {In 10 Destroyed {in 10 )'.ears) !'.ears) Contraband By relevant authorities

5344.12 Kgs. 44 76.482 kgs

867.638 (16%) ORISSA Orissa has divided its response in two parts. One is se.izure

• by Pol ice and the Other is seizure by Excise Officials. Item Total Quan tit)'. Total Quan tit)'. Difference Seized {In 10 Destro:i:ed {in 10 years) years) Contraband By Police 88241.741 Kgs

0.000 Bv Excise 34520.854 Kgs (100%)

0.000 By Police- 88241.741 Kgs (100%) By Excise 34520.854 Kgs (100%)

PUNJAB Item Tutal Quantity Total Quan tit)'. Difference Seized {In 10 Destroved (in lO i:ears) years) Poppy Husk 8,93,948.452 kg 4,00,678.069 kg Onium

4936.031 ke

965.818 k!! Smack - - - ---·~ -- - - -

20045.293 kg

104.631 kg 4,93,270.3 83 kg (55.°17%) 3970.213 -·---- . _(80.43%) 19940.662 (99.47%) A B c D E F G H 672 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2016] I S.C.R. A

RAJASIHAN 'Item Tut al Quantity Total Quanti!:£ Difference Seized {!n 10 Destroyed years) IO years) (in B c Brown Sugar

146.996 kg

23.381 kg Heroine

173.216 kg

3.25 kg Smack Opium

275.246 kg

82.423 kg

6687.081 kg

2006.745 kg Charas

935.602 kg

1192.309 D Ganja

176289.677 kg

2578.712 kg

123.615 kg (84.094%) 169.966 kg (98.12%\ 192.823 kg (70.05%) 4680.335 kg (69.99%) Destroyed more than seized 174250.965 kg (98.84%) Poppy Straw

99684.05 kgs

1.34,652.55 kg Destroyed more than seized. E

SIKKIM Item Total Quanti!v Total Quanti!Y Difference Seized (!n years) relevant authorities IO Destroyed IO years) Bv (in F N-IO Capsure 9156 ** •• 9156 ( 100%) 277367 (100%) 277367 3033 Spasmo Proxyvon Cansule Corex/ Phensidylerec Otllers **The State Governn1ent of Sikkim has replied that the destruction rt done as per the orders of the Trial Court on the conclusion of Trial. However, no details related to disposal has been provided. 3033 (100%) •• ••

203.92gms . G H UNION OF INDIA v. MOHANLAL [T. S. THAKUR, CJ!.] 673 Total Quan tine Total Quantit:y Difference 10 Destro:yed {in Seized 10 vears) vears) 19366.98 kg (!n

TAMILNADU Item Ganja(Dry 656778 kg +Green) Charas 13 kg Heroin Cocaine

66.42 kg I kg I kg

66.425 kg 15.4 kg Brown Smmr Opium Hash Oil Tidigesic in.i. Norphine Bosikka Diazepam Poppy Cap/Straws Avil

0.015 kg 0

30.4 kg l.738kg JO kg I 3627 vials I kg 4095 vials I 12 amps 0 9 9.085 kg+ 2706 246.75 kg 0 4.5 I (kg or vial not sure) 125.05 kg 350 tabs+ 55 vials 0

TRIPURA Item Ganja Total Quantitt Total Quantit:y Difference Seized vears) 9178.8 10 Destro:yed {in 10 vears) 2642.5 kg (!n Ganja Dust 436 kg 87 kgs

6536.3 kg (71.21%) 349 kgs (80.04%)

637411.02 kg (97.051%) 12 kg (92.30%) 0 Destroyed more than seized 0.015 kg ( 100%) 29.262 kg (96.25%) 9 kg(90%) 9532 vials (69.94%) 112amps ( 100%) 9(100%) 12l.7kg (49.32%) 350 tabs+ 55 A B c D E F G ~ H 674 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2016] I S.C.R. A

UITAR PRADESH • There is huge discrepancy between the Quantity seized and the Quantity destroyed. .!1m!. Opium Smack Heroin Ganja {In Total Quanti!l; Tgtal Quanlit~ J..!if(erenc£ lO Destroyed {in Seized 10 vears) vearsl 198.025 kg 1278.016 kg

455.543 kg

244.443 kg

503.664kg

13.759 kg

92525.859 11,820.191 kg Charas

9099.432 kg

2234.481 kg Intoxicating Powder (Cocaine) Brown Sugar

3658.065 kg

1035.275 kg

51.455 kg I.I kg Posta Drug

16224.591 kg

5081.988 kg

UITARAKHAND lli!!! Total Quantitr Total Quantitr Difference IO Des!ro~ed (in Seized 10 vearsl vearsl 330.459 kg 1252.091 kg (In

6783.765 kg

330.459 kg Charas Doda B c D E F Opium

28.899kg

1.859 kg Heroine

154.454 kg 0 Intoxicating Tablets Ganja Smack 224!3 Nos 4668 Nos. ll21.740kg

508.300 kg

8.761kg+1022 packets

0.432 kg+ 530 Packets Injection 1924 Nos 5 Nos. Brown Sugar .3 89 kg 0 G H

1079.99 kg (84.5%) 211.lkg (46.3%) 489.905 kg (97.2%) 80705.668 kg (87.22%\ 6864.951 kg (75.44%) 2622.79 Kg (71.69%) 51.355 kg (99.8%\ 11,142.603 kg (68.67%)

921.632 kg (73.60%) 6453.306 (95.12%) 27.04kg (93.567%) 154.454 kg (100%) 17745 Nos (79.17%) 613.44 kg (54.686%) 8.329 kg (95.06%) + 492 Pkts 148.140%l 1919 Nos (99.74%) .389 kg (100%) UNION OF INDIA v. MOHANLAL [T. S. THAKUR, CJ!.] 675 29 Item WEST BENGAL Total Seized l'ti!r~l D::r rs; levant authn riths 88520.J JI 7 kg Quantit:Y Total Quantitv Difference {In 10 DestrOl'ed {in I 0 lill.W 0

88520.JJ 17 k[!(J00o/o1 Contraband Note:- West Be11gal ltas stated tltal it does not have atty i111111ediate records available of destruction.

5. /11 regard to the storage of1VDPS ~;ubstances, !he State Governments and the Central Agencies ha1'e furnished information ll'l11cli the learned Amicus Curiae has tabulated as under: Annexure D Delhi Govt. Yes. specified store for No storage of contraband Zonal Unit. seized Delhi store. G uiara t Govt. specific Guwahati Govt. NBC Gu wahati Zonal Unit is running from a rented house and secured storal!e nlace. earmarked Imphal Go\•t. M izoram G O\'t, Tripura Govt. Stored in god own of NCB -1 after sealing. l\1eghalaya Go\'t. Excise Malkhana generally used to store contrabands. All district Excise office M alkhana rooms. Himachal Pradesh Govt. No sp·ecified area. No s~ec ific No specified store. J\•I aha rash tra Govt., Goa and Daman Diu specific place Maharashtra for storage. Uttar Pradesh Govt. No UP specific drugs. storage of narcotic In Goa: Mala khan a Police Station. Daman & Diu and Dadar & Nagar Haveli: Kept M alkhn na Police Station. to storage of Then sent competent Court chargeshe et is filed.

A ndhra Pradesh Govt. Cbhattisgarh Govt. No storage. separate No specified area. Rajasthan Govt. Sikkim GO\'t. llttarakhand Govt. No specific store. No storage. No specific store. Jbarkhand Govt. Kerala Govt. Karnataka Govt. No specific store. No storae:e. specific No notified store. A B c D E F G H 676 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2016] I S.C.R. A B c D E F G H Madhya Pradesh Govt Orissa Govt. Bihar Govt Patna Zonal Unit of NCB has specified room Withdrawal only under order of the Court. specific Yes, NCB Zonal Unit No Indore ahs ll'e II-secured store. maalkhana specific (Submissions by NCB Indore Zonal unit) No specific Store for storage after seizure by Station. Police (Submissions by Police Heads) Punjab Govt. Haryana Govt Chandigarh Govt. specified No store. in all A Room called Malkhana is specifically designated seized contrabands. Malkhana police stations for storage contraband Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances.

Tamil Nadu Customs and Central Excise Directorate of Revenue Intelligence No Spedfic space. storage No specific storage No specific store of its is available own. NCB, Jodhpur Zone NCB, Chandigarh Zone West Bengal Yes, But no sub¥zone A separate available. has been specified storage seized contraband. room The stored seized goods in Police Station of Malkhana under the charge of a designated Police Officer and supeivision of officer in charge of Police Station.

6. Similarly, in answer to the query as to the steps taken at the time of storage to detennine the nature and the quantity of the substance being stored and measures to prevent substitution ancVor pilferage from the stores, the State Governments have sent their replies which too have been summarised by the Amicus Curiae in the following words: UNION OF INDIA v. MOHANLAL [T. S. THAKUR, CJI.] 677 ANNEXURE-F iii. What are the steps taken at the time of storage to determine the nature and quantity of the substance being store and measures to prevent substitution and pilferage from stores? Delhi Govt. Proper entry in 1nalkha register malkha incharg e proper! y locked guarded @Pg 10 of Delhi Gort. sub1niss All Gujarat Govt. Writer head Police station maintains 1nuddatnal register complete details. subsequent withdrawal redisposition reflected tnuddamal register @Pg.2 Gujarat Govt. submission Guwahati Govt.

Complete process of classificati on and weighing of drugs along with measures prevention pilferage mentioned @ Pg.No.52 Guwahati Govt submission Imphal Go,·t. Complete process of classificati weighing -along with measures prevention pilferage 1nentioned @ Pg. No. 74 Imphal Govt. submission l\'lizoram Govt. Utmost care in \Veighing n1easurem ents by officer-in charge. @page IOI of sub1n ission s by Mizora1n Govt. Tripura Govt. Malkhana officer in charge carefully keeps the contraban ds in the 1nalkhana maintaini register. (q;Pg.No. 3 of submissio · n by Tripura Govt. ~ghalaya Govt. General detecting officer weighi contra ban d \Vith signatures of civilian \Yitnesses proper entry in 1\1aharashtr a Govt., Goa and Daman Diu. Contraband ,Mudden1al Clerk separate cupboard. @ Pg.6. packed Goa: Contraband Cbhnttisg a rh Go,·t. Andhra Pradesh G·ovt. Details of all steps to determine the nature quantity substance being __ store and During storage details entered storage roo1n register.

St6re l-liin11ch·a1 Pradesh Govt. NDPS seized by investigati ng ofl'icer. After san1ples affixing taken, sa nle seized . 1.0. o,vn l! tta r Pradesh Govt. After Seizure conccrne d drug is weighed Subseque 11tly a sa1nple is ... taken out bag and both arc \Veighed separate! y. A B c D E F G H 678 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2016) I S.C.R. packed and sealed the spot of seizure. Entry m Mudamma, register show chain movements custody. @ pg. 8. resealed by SHO before consigning custody police malkhana Police Station @ Pg.No.3 HP and Govt. submission. measures to prevent substitutio n pilferage stores elaborated @ Pg.No. 3 submissio Chhattisga rh Govt. by @ is duly sealed guards /station posted. pg.no. 2 A.P. Govt submis Both sample and main stock are ,wrapped in a piece sealed. The sample forensic testing packed sealed and kept in the malkhana. @ Pg.6 of subn1issio ns by U.P. Govt. register - and Jock it. @pg.7 Annex- A-2 Meghala ya Govt.

I Submissi I ~~---- Acc. To Report of Comm. Of Customs @Pg.67: Stored in Central Godown vaults double locking system command a Gazetted Officer .. Daman & of Diu Dadar & Na gar Haveli: re1note chances of substitution I pilferage , stored subject periodical inspection Page 9 of Response Rajasthan Govt. Sikkim Govt. Utta ra Govt. Jharkhand Govt. Kera la Govt. Karnataka Govt ·No specific answer. Ho\Vever packing NDPS packed sealed NDPS sa1nple is sent to tbrensic Material objects is sealed and packed During recovery a pinch of the substance is A B c D E F G H UNION OF INDIA v. MOHANLAL [T. S. THAKUR, CJ!.] 679 stamp of IO ' and nature and quantity recorded presence individual witnesses. Page II of Response. resources for storage according· to quantity and nature contraband @ Pg.No. 2 submission Rajasthan Govt. Madhya Pradesh Govt.· 0 rissa . Govt. NCB Seized By Indore Zonal sealed Office. Seized contraband a mannef properly.

Page 9 of Response laboratory. For preventing substitution, details entered station dial)' concerned· police station. Complete safety measures mentioned in Annex-3 ·with govt. submission. Page 5 of -the Response tested with the help of field test kit indicative test. After positive indicative result, officer makes detailed inventory. The seized are stored departmental · godown or the judicial godown a representative sampk is sent laboratol)' for chemical analysis. IO of @ pg. submission by Karnataka · Govt. -·Bihar Govt. Punjab Govt. Haryan a Govt. . (4randi Govt . Seized contraba Weekly fortnight nd reports obtained Malkha na under from all l6ck . safely Police officials deployed ·all NDPS Seized sealed and , produce Maalkha · d before na. . A B c D E F G H SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2016] I S.C.R. the Court ~tores. and then ~ase stored in property .. egister concerned No more regarding seized/ storage of details 1nentioned after No.

19is NDPS. in Jnaintained Stock Register is Procedure maintaine tl1e seize< Pg. No. 3 ~s per and d by field units and periodical by •ules 1934. checking is done. Punjab sub1nissi Police nspection oy gazette pfficers. @pg. 121 [email protected]. 16andl7 submissio ~ubmissio Haryana 1 by Punjab Povt. Govt. n it. After registers. and producing before pilferage. in permissim on of maalkhana seale< seizun condition cour Bihar tl1e drug: Govt. deposited u1 wrapped minimize trans parent polythene and tl1e then in white chances o Maalkha sealing signing Quality an1ount seized drug is goods mentioned the packet. @ Pg. 5 of submissions by M.P. Govt By police districts: A memo is agai1 with prepared u/s 55 proper ofNDPS Act a entry ar> 0 wider th• storage th< custody o police statior Maa!khan malkhana and a Officer. sealed b~ Station HouS< Page 2 anc 3 of th< Officer. Response. Necessary entries Rojnamcha prope1ty register 1naintained in polic' station.

At page 4 o the Response. ar< seizec 680 A B c D E F G 1-1 UNION OF INDIA v. MOHANLAL [T. S. THAKUR, CJ!.] 681 Customs Central Excise The seized contraband is deposited godown/ malkhana on the basis particulars ·mentioned NCR Zonal Office, Chandigarh The seized stored stored under proper supervision ITBP Guard. No charge authorized to enter the store. seizure memo/ ·panchnama Proper and secured packing and sealing Page 6 of contraband Response. ensures safety. Page 11 of Response. Tamil Directorate of N adu Revenue Intelligence No such The instance arisen. sealed contained containing the seized goods is handed over to Custodian under proper documentation The f NCB Zonal Officer, Jodhnur As Govem1ne nt of India Notificati on, circular 1/89 page 3 of the Response. inventory, seizure · memo as well as the paper seals on sealed container duly signed by pan ch witnesses, accused seizing officer. The custodian are responsible for appropriate action prevent substitution and pilferage. West Bengal The seized goods are packed labeled and sealed by the Officer and are handed over to the officer in charge with copy of seizure list. Details are the Malkhana Register having counter signed of dealing officer. incotporated

7. The reports submitted by the State Governments and the Central Agencies further claim that stock registers maintained at the storage sites are periodically checked by the staff mentioned in the reports. A B c D E F G H 682 A B c D E F SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2016] I S.C.R. Another question that was asked from the StatJ Governments and the Central Agency relates to the condition of the storage facilities, shortage of storage facilities, if any, and whether any steps have been taken or are being taken to remove the deficiencies. Answers to those queries suggest that no proper storage facilities are available in most of the States. For instance, in Gujarat no special storage facility is available for keeping the contraband, which is, therefore, stored in general muddamal room. In Assam the NBC Guwahati Zonal Unit is said to be running from a rented house and one secured room is earmarked for storage with triple locking system under the supervision of the Superintendent. In Imphal, the store room is overflowing with contraband. Since there is shortage of space, pre-trial disposal process has been initiated to decrease congestion in godowns. Although Mizoram Government claims that there is no lack of storage facility, no information as to any specific storage facility being earmarked for the purpose has been provided. In Tripura the enforcement branch is said to be maintaining the malkhana used for. storage of contraband~. In Himachal Pradesh there is no storage facility except an old building used for the purpose, while in Chhattisgarh the storage facility is satisfactory but not sufficient for bulk storage. Similarly, Rajasthan has scarcity of storage facility. Jharkhand has no.separate storage facility at all whereas Kerala has satisfactory storage facilities only in some of the dis\ric.ts. In Orissa and Bihar the storage facilities are totally insufficient and unsatisfactory. States of Haryana, Madhya Pradesh, Goa, Daman Diu and Dadar & Nagar Haveli and Andhra Pradesh claim to have no problems with storage facility while Tamil . Nadu does not have any separate storage.

8. Directorate of Revenue Intelligence has not provided any inforination while NCB Zonal Office, Jodhpur has no shortage of space. NCB Zonal Office, Chandigarh has reported insufficiency of space and has started the process for construction of a specified storage facility. Customs and Central Excise Authority has reported that their godown is full and no more space is available. · G H

In answer to the question as to who is authorised to app!y to the Court to destroy the seized contraband and whether there has been any failure or dereliction in making such applications and whether any person having technical knowledge of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substance (natural and synthetic) is associated with the process of destruction of the contraband: the reply submitted by the State Governments suggest that different persons in different States have been UNION OF !NOIA v. MOHANLAL [T. S. THAKUR, CJ!.] 683 authorised to make such applications to the Courts concerned except in Tripura where no particular person is authodsed. In some cases Officer in- charge of the Police Station has been authorised while in others the 1.0. is also empowered to apply for permission to destroy the contraband. In answer to the question whether any action has been taken against anyone who should have applied for permission to destroy the narcotics but had not done so, State Governments have all answered in the negative implying thereby that either no dereliction of duty has occurred on the part of any officer competent to apply for destruction or no action has been taken for any such dereliction. · I 0. Similarly, regarding the steps taken at the time of destruction to determine the nature and quantity of the substance being destroyed, the reports submitted by the State Governments give varying answers. There is no uniformity in the procedure adopted by those associated or in charge of the process of destruction. The reports suggest as if adequate steps are taken to prevent damage, loss, pilferage and tampering/ substitution of the narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances from the point of search to the point of destruction but there is no uniformity or standard procedure prescribed or followed in that regard. Having said that we must mention that we are in these proceedings concerned with the following three issues only for the present: A B c D (i) Seizure and sampling of the Narcotic drugs and E Psychotropic substances (ii) their storage and (iii) their destruction Seizure and sampling:

11. Section 52-A(l) of the NDPS Act, 1985 empowers the Central Government to prescribe by a notification the procedure to be followed for seizure, storage and disposal of drugs and psychotropic substances. The Central Government have in exercise of that power issued Standing Order. No. 1/89 which prescribes the procedure to be followed while conducting seizure of the contraband. Two subsequent standing orders one dated 10.05.2007 and the other.dated 16.01.2015 deal with disposal and destruction of seized contraband and do not alter · or add to the earlier standing order that prescribes the procedure for conducting seizures. Para 2.2 of the Standing Order 1/89 states that samples must be taken from the seized contrabands on the spot at the F G H 684 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2016] 1 S.C.R. A time of recovery itself. It reads: "2.2. All the packages/containers shall be serially numbered and kept in lots for sampling. Samples from the narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances seized, shall be drawn on the spot of recovery, in duplicate, in the presence of search witnesses (Panchas) and the person from whose possession the drug is recovered, and a mention to this effect should invariably be made in the panchnama drawn on the spot. " Most of the States, however, claim that no samples are drawn at the time of seizure. Directorate of Revenue Intelligence is by far the only agency which claims that samples are drawn at the time of seizure, while Narcotics Control Bureau asserts that it does not do so. There is thus no uniform practice or procedure being followed by the States or the Central agencies in the matter of drawing of samples. This is, therefore, an area that needs to be suitably addressed in the light of the statutory provisions which ought to be strictly observed given the seriousness of the offences under the Act and the punishment prescribed by law in case the same are proved. We propose to deal with the issue no matter briefly in an attempt to remove the confusion that prevails regarding the true position as regards drawing of samples.

12. Section 52A as amended by Act 16 of 2014, deals with disposal of seized drugs and psychotropic substa11ces. It reads: "Section 52A : Disposal of seized narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances. (I) The Central Government may, having regard to the hazardous nature of any narcotic drugs or psychotropic substances, their vulnerability to theft, substitution, constraints of proper storage space or any other relevant considerations, by notification published in the Official Gazette, specify such narcotic drugs or psychotropic substances or class of narcotic drugs or class of psychotropic substances which shall, as soon as may be after their seizure, be disposed of by such officer and in such manner as that Government may from time to time, determine after following the procedure hereinafter specified. (2) Where any narcotic drug or psychotropic substance has been seized and forwarded to the officer-in-charge of the B c D E F G H UNION OF INDIA v.

MOHANLAL [T. S. THAKUR, CJ!.] 685 nearest police station or to the officer empowered under section 53, the officer referred to in sub-section (I) shall prepare an inventory of such narcotic drugs or psychotropic substances containing such details relating to their description, quality, quantity, mode of packing, marks, numbers or such other identifying particulars of the narcotic drugs or psychotropic substances or the packing in which they are packed, country of origin and other particulars as the officer referred to in sub-section (I) may consider relevant to the identity of the narcotic drugs or psychotropic substances in any proceedings under this Act and make an application, to any Magistrate for the purpose of- A B c ( a) certifying the correctness of the inventory so prepared; (b) taking, in the presence of such Magistrate, photographs of such drugs or substances and certifying such photographs as true; or D (c) allowing to draw representative samples of such drugs or substances, in the- presence· of such Magistrate and certifying the correctness of any list of samples so drawn.

(3) When an application is made under sub-section (2), the Magistrate shall, as soon as may be, allow the application. E (4) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (1 of 1872) or the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), every court trying an offence under this Act, shall treat the inventory, the photographs of {narcotic drugs, psychotropic substances, controlled substances or conveyances] and any list of samples drmvn under sub-section (2) and certified by the Magistrate, as primary evidence in respect of such offence.]"

13. It is manifest from Section 52A (2)(c) (supra) that upon seizure of the contraband the same has to be forwarded either to the officer in charge of the nearest police station or to the officer empowered under Section 53 who shall prepare an inventory as stipulated in the said provision and make an application to the Magistrate for purposes of(a) certifying the correctness of the inventory (b) certifying photographs of such drugs or substances taken before the Magistrate as true and (c) to F G H 686 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2016] I S.C.R. A B c D E F G H draw representative samples in the presence of the Magistrate and certifying the correctness of the list of samples so drawn. Sub-section (3) of Section 52-A requires that the Magistrate shall as soon as may be allow the application. This implies that no sooner the seizure is effected and the contraband forwarded to the officer in charge of the Police Station or the officer empowered, the officer concerned is in law duty bound to approach the Magistrate for the purposes mentioned above including grant of permission to draw representative samples in his presence, which samples will then be enlisted and the correctness of the list of samples so drawn certified by the Magistrate.

In other words, the process of drawing of samples has to be in the presence and under the supervision of the Magistrate and the entire exercise has to be certified by him to be correct. The question of drawing of samples at the time of seizure which, more often than not, takes place in the absence of the Magistrate does not in the above scheme of things arise. This is so especially when according to Section 52-A( 4) of the Act, samples drawn and certified by the Magistrate in compliance with sub-section (2) and (3) of Section 52-A above constitute primary evidence for the purpose of the trial. Suffice it to say that there is no provision in the Act that mandates taking of samples at the time of seizure. That is perhaps why none of the States claim to be taking samples at the time of seizure. Be that as it may, a conflict between the statutory provision governing taking of samples and the standing order issued by the Central Government is evident when the two are placed in juxtaposition.

There is no gainsaid that such a conflict shall have to be resolved in favour of the statute on first principles of interpretation but the continuance of the statutory notification in its present form is bound to create confusion in the minds of the authorities concerned instead of helping them in the discharge of their duties. The Central Government would, therefore, do well, to re examine the matter and take suitable steps in the above direction.

Mr. Sinha, learned Amicus, argues that if an amendment of the Act stipulating that the samples be taken at the time of seizure is not possible, the least that ought to be done is to make it obligatory for the officer conducting the seizure to apply to the Magistrate for drawing of samples. and certification etc.· without any loss of time. The officer conducting the seizure is also obliged to report the act of seizure and the making of the application to the superior officer in.writing so thatthere is a certain amount of accountability in the ·entire exercise, which as at present gets neglected for a variety of reasons. There is in our opinion UNION OF INDIA v .. MOHANLAL [T. S. THAKUR, CJI.) 687 no manner of doubt that the seizure.of the contraband must be followed by an application for drawing of samples and certification as contemplated under the Act. There is equally no doubt that the proc.ess of making any such application and resultant sampling and certification cannot be left to the whims of the officers concerned. The scheme of the Act in general and Section 52-A in particular, does not brook any delay in the matter of making of an application or the drawing of samples and certification. While we see no room for prescribing or reading a time frame into the provision, we are of the view that an application for sampling and certification ought to be made without undue delay and the Magistrate on receipt of any such applicaiion will be expected to attend to the application and do the needful, within a reasonable period and without any undue delay or procrastination as is mandated by sub-section (3) of Section 52A (supra). We hope and trust that the High Courts will keep a close watch on the performance of the Magistrates in this regard and through the Magistrates on the agencies that are dealing with the menace of drugs which has taken alarming dimensions in this country partly because of the ineffective and lackadaisical enforcement of the laws and procedures and cavalier manner in which the agencies and at times Magistracy in this country addresses a problem of such serious dimensions. • --~ STORAGE:

15. The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 does not make any special provision regulating storage of the contraband substances. All that Section 55 of the Act envisages is that the officer in charge of a Police Station shall take charge of and keep in safe custody · the seized article pending orders of the Magistrate concerned.·There is no provision nor was any such provision pointed out to us by learned counsel forthe parties prescribing the nature of the storage facilitfto be used for storage of the contraband substances. Even so the importance of adequate storage facilities for safe deposit and storage of the contraband material has been recognised by the Government inasmuch as Standing Order No.1/89 has made specific provisions in regard to the same. Section Ill of the said Order tleals with "Receipt of Drugs in Godowns and Procedure" which inter alia provides that all drugs shall invariably be stored in "safes and vaults" provided with double locking system and that the agencies of the Central and the State Governments· may specifically designate their godowns for storage purposes and such A B c D E F G H 688 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2016] I S.C.R. A B c D E F G H godowns should be selected keeping in view their security angle, juxtaposition to courts etc. We may usefully extract paras 3 .2 to 3.9 comprising Section Ill supra at this stage for ready reference: "'3.2. All drugs invariably be stored in safes and vaults provided with double-locking system. Agencies of the Central and State Governments, may specifically, designate their godowns for storage purposes. The godowns should be selected keeping in view their security angle, juxtaposition to courts etc.

3.3 Such godowns, as a matter of rule, shall be placed under the over-al/ supenision and charge of a Gazetted Officer of the respective enforcemellf agency, who shall exercise utmost care, circumspection and personal supervision as far as possible. Each seizing officer shall deposit the drugs fully packed and sealed in the godown within 48 hours of such seii'ure, with a forwarding memo indicating NDPS Crime No. as per Crime and Prosecution (C & P Register) under the new law, name of the accused, reference of test memo, description of the drugs, total no. of packages/containers ef£.

3.4 The seizing officer, after obtaining an acknowledgement for such deposit in the format (Annexure-I). shall hand acknowledged over such to the Investigation Officer of the case along with the case dossiers for further proceedings.

3. 5 The officer-in-charge of the godown, before accepting the deposit of drugs, shall ensure that the same are properly packed and sealed. He shall also arrange the packages! containers (case-wise and lot-wise) for quick retrieval etc.

3. 6 The godown-in-charge is required to maillfain a register wherein entries of receipt should be made as per format at Annexure-Il

3. 7 It shall be incumbent upon the Inspecting Officers of the various Departments mentioned at Annexure II to make frequent visits to the godowns for ensuring adequate security and safety and for taking measures for timely disposal of drugs. The Inspecting Officers should record their remarks! observations against Col. I 5 of the Format at Annexure-ll. UNION OF INDIA v. MOHANLAL [T. S. THAKUR, CJ!.] 689

3.8 The Heads·of the respective enforcement agencies (both Central and State Governments) may prescribe such periodical reports and returns, as they may deem fit, to monitor the safe receipt, deposit, storage. accounting and disposal of seized drugs.

3.9 Since the early disposal of drugs assumes utmost consideration and importance, the enforcement agencies may obiain orders for pre-trial disposal of drugs and other articles (including conveyance, if any) by having recourse to the provisions of sub-section (2) of Section 52A of the Act. " • It is evident from a plain reading of para 3.2 (supra) that storage of all drugs in safes and vaults has been made mandatory and that agencies of the Central and the State Governments have been permitted to designate their godowns for storage purposes. It is also clear that keeping in view the importance of protecting the seized drugs against theft, substitution or pilferage the Central Government has prescribed that such godowns shall be placed under the overall supervision and charge of a gazetted officer of the respective enforcement agencies who shall exercise utmost care, circumspection and personal supervision over the storage facilities.

The provision contained in paras 3.5, 3.6, 3.7 and 3.8 also are aimed at ensuring that the godown or storage facility is satisfactory and those in charge of the same are made accountable for its upkeep and effective management. Subsequent Notification including Notification dated 16"' January, 2015 have in no way diluted the above requirement. The result is that there is a statutory framework which governs the storage of drugs and matters relating and incidental thereto. The question is whether the said statutory mechanism has been effectively implemented by the Central Government agencies and by the State Governments. Our answer regretfully is in the negative. It is evident from the responses received from the State and the Central Government agencies that no notified storage facility-godown has been established for storage of the seized drugs. Even the Narcotics Control Bureau has admitted to using mallkhana of the Courts for storage of the seized drugs in certain cases and in certain circumstances.

The Customs and Central Excise Department and DRI have also stated that they have no designated storage facility for storage of contraband. The position in the States is no different. Due to non-availability of any designated godown-facility with adequate vaults and double lock system, the seized contraband is stored in police maalkhana which is a common storage facility for all A B c D E F G H 690 SUPREME COlJf REPORTS [2016] l S.C.R. kinds of goods and weapons seized in connection with all kinds of offences including those specified by the !PC. This is a total.ly unhappy and unacceptable situati_on to say the least. It is indeed unfortunate that even after a lapse of26 years since Standing Order No. 1189 was issued, the Central Government or its agencies and the State Governments have paid little or no attention to the need for providing adequate storage facilities Of-the kind stipulated in Standing Order No.

1189 with the necessary supervisory and other controls prescribed in :'\ection Ill of the said order. The result is that while Standing Order No. 1189 very early in point oftirile recognized the need for providing adequate and effective storage facilities by the States and the Central Government agencies,"·- the failure on the part of the Central Government and the State Governments to provide for such storage has defeated, if not completely negated the very purpose underlying the said notification and the provisions made therein. There is as on date hardly any credible protection againsttheft, replacement, pilferage and destruction of the seized drugs on account of the wholly unsatisfactory and unscientific method of storage of drugs and psychotropic substances whiclrat times hit the headlines in newspapers on account of what is often described by the agencies as "big catch" worth crores of rupees in the international market.

Wh,at has defied our understanding is the neglect on the part of the Central Government and its agencies and the State Governments in realizing the importance of the storJtge facilities and in providing for the same to prevent hazardous and at times lethal substances with great potential to do harm to those wh'o use the same from being replaced, pilfered, stolen or siphoned out on account of very poor supervision, control or invigilation over such storage facilities. The learned -amicus has in that view very right!)' argued that there is a complete failure on the part of the Central Government aod its agencies as also the State Governments in taking adequate steps for providing proper storage facilities with proper system of supervision and control over the drugs tharare stored in the same. It was contended by Mr. Sinha, and in our Opi. (lion rightly· so, that the cumulative effect of the reports submitted by the States and the Central agencies is that only 16% of the contrabands seized between 2002 to 2012 have been actually disposed of.

What happened td the remaining 84% of such seizures is anybody's guess and ifit is still lying in the police maalkhana; why has nobody ever bothered to apply for their disposal _ according to the procedure established by law is hard to fathom. TJie fact that the States and the Central Government agencies have accepted A B c D E F G H UNION OF iNDIA v. MOHANLAL [T. S. THAKUR, CJ!.] 691 that no specific register is maintained by the State Police and that general maalkhana register alone is being maintained for the seized drugs shows the neglect of all concerned towards this important aspect and the cavalier manner in which the issue regarding storage of ceased drugs is approached by them. Absence of periodical inspection of the storage facility and the absence of any record suggesting that any inspection has been carried out by any of the officers shows a complett>failure bordering criminal negligence by officers who are supposed to be taking action in this regard but have failed to do so.

16. The menace of drugs in this country, as observed earlier has alanning dimensions and proportions. Studies based on conferences and seminars have very often shown tliat the menace is deep rooted not only because drug lords have the money power and transnational links but also because the enforcement agencies like the Police and at times politicians in power help them in carrying on what is known to be a money spinning and flourishing trade. We only hope that the failure of the Central Government agencies and the State Governments in providing what is the .bare minimum in terms of infrastructure required to artest the growing menace and prevent pilferage and re-circulation of drugs back into the market is not oh account of any unholy connect between the drug traffickers and the enforcement agencies. We woula comfort ourselves by presuming them to be relatable only to apathy and indifference and hopethl!tthe system does not get corrupted by continued neglect lest all hopes are lost in the fight.against drug menace which are eating into the vitals of our society. It is in that spirit that we deem it necessary to issue appropriate· directions to the Central Government agencies and to the States to set up adequate storage facilities with effective supervisory and regulatory controls as prescribed in Notification No. 1/89. A B c D E F Disposal of Drugs:

17. Section 52A as amended provides for disposal of the seized .. contraband in the manner stipulated by the Government under Clause I of that Section: Notification dated 16"' January, 2015 has, in supersession of the earlier notification dated JOlhMay, 2007 not only stipulates that all drugs and psychotropic substances have. to be disposed off but also identifies the officers who shall initiate action fur disposal and the procedure to be followed for such disposal. Para 4 of the Notification inter alia, provides that officer-in-charge of the Police Station shall G H 692 A B c D E F SUPREME C01",f REPORTS [2016) I S.C.R. within 30 days from the date of receipt of chemical analysis report of drugs, psychotropic substances or controlled substances apply to any Magistrate under Section 52A(2) in terms of Annexure 2 to the said Notification.

Sub-para (2) of Para (4) provides that after the Magistrate · allows the application under sub-section (3) of Section 52A, the officer mentioned in sub para (I) of Para (4) shall preserve the certified inventory, photographs and samples drawn in the presence of the Magistrate as primary evidence for the case and submit details of seized items to the Chairman of the Drugs Disposal committee for a decision by the Committee on the question of disposal. The officer shall also send a copy of the details along with the items seized to the officer in-charge of the godown. Para (5) of the notification provides for constitution of the Drugs Disposal Committee while para (6) specifies the functions which the Committee shall perform. In para (7) the notification provides for procedure to be followed with regard to disposal of the seized items, while para (8) stipulates the quantity or the value upto which the Drugs Disposal Committee can order disposal of the seized items. In terms of proviso to para (8) ifthe consignments are larger in quantity or of higher value than those indicated in the table, the Drugs Disposal Committee is required to send its recommendations to the head of the department who shall then order their disposal by a high level Drugs Disposal Committee specially constituted for that purpose. Para (9) prescribes the mode of disposal of the drugs, while para (10) requires the Committee to intimate to the head of the Department the programme of destruction and vestthe head of the Department with the power to conduct a surprise check or depute an officer to conduct such checks on destruction operation. Para (11) deals with certificate of destruction while paras (12) and (13) deal with details of sale to be entered into the godown register and communication to be sent to Narcotic Control Bureau.

There are two other aspects that need to be noted at this stage. The first is that notification dated I 6" January, 2015 does not in terms supersede Standing Order No. I /89 insofar as the said Standing Order also prescribes the procedure to be followed for disposal of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic and controlled Substances and Conveyances. Specific overriding of the earlier Standing Order would have avoided a certain amount of confusion which is evident on account of simultaneous presence of Standing Order No. 1189 and notification dated 16" January, 2015. For instance in para (I) of Standing Order No. 1189 only certain G H UNION OF INDIA v. MOHANLAL [T. S. THAKUR, CJI.] 693 narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances enumerated therein could be disposed of while notification dated l 6'h January, 2015 provides for disposal ofall Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic and controlled Substances and Conveyances.

20. To sum up we direct as under: (1) No sooner the seizure of any Narcotic Drugs and B Psychotropic and controlled Substances and Conveyances is effected, the same shall be forwarded to the officer in- charge of the nearest police station or to the officer empowered under Section 53 of the Act. The officer concerned shall then approach the Magistrate with an c application under Section 52A(ii) of the Act, which shall be allowed by the Magistrate as soon as may be required under Sub-Section 3 of Section 52A, as discussed by us in the body of this judgment under the heading 'sejzure and sampling'. The sampling shall be done under the supervision of the magistrate as discussed in paras 13 and 14 of this order. D (2) The Central Government and its agencies and so also the State Governments shal I within six months from today take appropriate steps to set up storage facilities forthe exclusive storage of seized Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic and E controlled Substances and Conveyances duly equipped with vaults and double locking system to prevent theft, pilferage or replacement of the seized drugs. The Central Government and the State Governments shall also designate an officer each for their respective storage facility and provide for other steps, measures as stipulated in Standing Order No. 1/89 to ensure proper security against theft, pilferage or replacement of the seized drugs. F (3) The Central Government and the State Governments shall be free to set up a storage facility for each district in the States and depending upon the extent of seizure and store required, one storage facility for more than one districts. (4) Disposal of the seized drugs currently lying in the police maalkhans and other places used for storage shall be carried out by the DDCs concerned in terms of the directions issued G H 696 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2016] 1 S.C.R. A B by us in the body of this judgment under the heading 'disposal of drugs'.

21. Keeping in view the importance of the subject we request the Chief Justices of the High Courts concerned to appoint a Committee of Judges on the administrative side to supervise and monitor progress made by the respective States in regard to the compliance with the above directions and wherever necessary, to issue appropriate directions for a speedy action on the administrative and even on the judicial side in public interest wherever considered necessary.

22. List the appeal for final hearing now on an early date. c Kalpana K. Tripathy Matter Adjourned.