Impact of NDPS Act on Drug Abuse in India

SOCIOLOGY II
NARCOTICS DRUGS PSYCHOTROPIC SUBSTANCES ACT,

1985: IMPACT ANALYSIS
CHANAKYA NATIONAL LAW

UNIVERSITY
SUBMITTED TO:-
DR. SANGEET KUMAR
FACULTY of SOCIOLOGY
SUBMITTED BY:
MAITREYA SAHA
ROLL NO – 1541
B.A. LLB, 2ND SEMESTER

Page |2
DECLARATION
I hereby declare that the work reported in the B.A.LL.B (Hons.) Project Report entitled
“Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act: Impact Analysis”
submitted at Chanakya National Law University, Patna is an authentic record of
my work carried under the supervision of Dr. Sangeet Kumar. I have not submitted this
work elsewhere for any other degree or diploma. I am fully responsible and aware of the
contents of my project report.
Maitreya Saha
Chanakya National Law University, Patna
/04/2017
Page |3
Contents
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT.........................................................................................................4
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY...............................................................................................5
SAMPLING TECHNIQUES.................................................................................................5
METHODS OF DATA COLLECTION.................................................................................5
SOURCE OF DATA...............................................................................................................5
Primary sources..................................................................................................................5
Secondary sources..............................................................................................................5
TOOLS OF DATA COLLECTION........................................................................................5
AIMS AND OBJECTIVES....................................................................................................6
HYPOTHESIS.......................................................................................................................6
RESEARCH QUESTIONS....................................................................................................6
LIMITATIONS.......................................................................................................................7
METHOD OF WRITING......................................................................................................7
MODE OF CITATION...........................................................................................................7
INTRODUCTION......................................................................................................................8
CHAPTER I: SUBSTANCE ABUSE.....................................................................................12
Public health definitions...................................................................................................13
Medical definitions...........................................................................................................13
Drug misuse.....................................................................................................................14
As a value judgment.........................................................................................................15
CHAPTER II: THE HISTORY OF INDIAN LEGISLATIONS: CURBING DRUG ABUSE16
CHAPTER III: THE NARCOTIC DRUGS AND PSYCHOTROPIC SUBSTANCES ACT,
1985..........................................................................................................................................20
CHAPTER IV: EFFECTIVENESS OF THE ACT..................................................................25
CONCLUSION........................................................................................................................32
SUGGESTIONS..................................................................................................................45
Page |4
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Writing a project is one of the most significant parts of academics in the present educational
scenario. Though this project has been mostly prepared and presented by me, there are many
people who remain in veil, who gave their all support and helped me to complete this project.
First of all I am very grateful to my subject teacher without his kind support and help,
completion of this project would have become a herculean task for me. He, Sangeet Kumar
made time out of his busy schedule to help me to complete this project more so he provide
mw with valuable suggestions about how to and from where to collect relevant and authentic
information.
I am very thankful to the librarian who provided me with several books on this topic which
proved beneficial in completing this project.
Lastly, I would like to acknowledge the contribution of my friends who provided their
valuable and meticulous advices which were definitely useful for writing the project. I also
want to convey my sincerest gratitude to my parents for helping me.
MAITREYA SAHA
Page |5
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
For the project research, researcher will rely upon the doctrinal and non-doctrinal methods of
Research.
SAMPLING TECHNIQUES
The researcher will be adopting convenient purposive sampling due to paucity of time.
METHODS OF DATA COLLECTION
a) Observation
b) Interview
c) Questionnaire
SOURCE OF DATA
Primary sources
a) Field Work
b) Interviews
c) Case laws
Secondary sources
a) Books on economy
b) Newspaper
c) Observation Magazines
d) Websites
TOOLS OF DATA COLLECTION

a) Observation guide
b) Interview Schedule
Page |6
c) Notepad
d) Pen/Paper
AIMS AND OBJECTIVES
The aim of the researcher is to:
a) Understand the gravity of the problem of substance abuse in India.

b) The governmental initiatives adopted to combat the menace of drug abuse.
c) To understand the impact of these initiatives on the problem of drug abuse.
HYPOTHESIS
The researcher has assumed that,
a) There were various legislations before the NDPS Act came in, however their
effectiveness can be questioned.
b) The introduction of the NDPS Act was not beneficial for the Indian Pharmaceutical
companies
c) The NDPS Act has not been very effective in curbing the drug abuse
d) The NDPS Act needs to be amended to meet the present day demands
RESEARCH QUESTIONS
a) What is drug abuse and what is the gravity of drug abuse at different places in India?
b) Were there early laws to curb the drug abuse in India?
c) Were those laws enough to deal with the drug abuse problem? What was the need for
the NDPS Act?
d) What are the provisions of the NDPS Act that make it effective?- if at all it is effective
e) What is the present scenario of drug abuse in India after the enactment and
enforcement of the NDPS Act- what is the level of awareness among the common
folks about the NDPS Act?
f) The Social, Economic and Psychological impact of drug abuse among different age
groups
Page |7
LIMITATIONS
Owing to the enormity of the scope of the subject matter at hand and the presence of various
other limiting factors like that of area more so because of the dearth of time the researcher
will has not been able to cover every nuance of the project topic and other relevant topics.
METHOD OF WRITING
The method of writing followed in the following project is primarily analytical.
MODE OF CITATION
The researcher has followed uniform mode of citation for the completion of this project.
INTRODUCTION
Page |8
For proper understand of the project we first need to understand the essence and the spirit of
The Narcotics Drugs Psychotropic Substances Act. It was aptly stated by Mahatma Gandhi in
All India Social Service Conference, at Calcutta- as early as 1917–
“The cocaine habit was sapping the nation’s manhood, and that like the drink habit, it was on
the increase in its effect more deadly than drink”
With the advent of World War II there was a rise in the availability of recreational drugs and
their consumption. This could largely be attributed to a number of factors. Firstly, a large
section of the world population was subject to psychological problems of a wide variety. This
could be seen in a number of war veterans who seemed to face a post-war crisis of existence
filled with a void and emptiness. This could have been fuelled by the fact that this period saw
rising levels of unemployment due to demand-supply disproportionalities. Another reason for
the increase in addicts could be attributed to an increase in the availability of these drugs. For
example; there was an increase in Western- tourists to certain third world countries where
specific substances are indigenous. The phenomenon has become graver in India over the
years where the number of drug users has increased rapidly.
The problem is multidimensional as drug use is often correlated with other offences such as
organized crime and human trafficking along with health hazards like HIV-AIDS. The
country known among drug users for opium and cannabis has witnessed a surge in drug-
tourism over the years. The need for legislation was recognized by the British through the
enactment of the Opium Act of 1857 which was followed by another legislation of the same
name in 1878.The desire for an all-encompassing legislation was only fulfilled in the 20th
Century with the Dangerous Drugs Act of 1930.These enactments however were far from
perfect as they were not equipped to tackle drug use in a holistic manner. Another issue was
that of effectiveness as they provided for meager punishments which could not serve as a
sufficient deterrent for habitual offenders.
The Second World War however brought the establishment of various International bodies
that oversaw the evolution of various general principles. The clearest manifestation of this
general principle in the context of health can be found in Article 25 of the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights and Article 12 of the International Covenant on Economic,
Social and Cultural Rights which seek to promote the highest attainable standards of physical
and mental health. Along with these general principles, there were also specific international
Page |9
instruments like the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961 and, more importantly, the
Convention on Psychotropic Substances, 1971 which aimed at tackling drug use and abuse in
a wider sense.
In view of rising International standards and awareness, India saw the need to incorporate
these principles into a substantive legislation that would function holistically in the domestic
sphere. Hence, the ‘National Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act’ is born with its
enactment by President Giani Zail Singh in 1985 .The act is dichotomous as it deals with
trafficking of prohibited substances i.e. cultivation, manufacture, distribution as well as their
consumption. The act classifies drugs into small, less than commercial and commercial and
lists punishments based on this classification. The enactment includes substances obtained
from nature such as Ganja (Marijuana) along with narcotic and psychotropic drugs. For e.g. ;
Sec. 8 of the Act explicitly prohibits the cultivation of opium, poppy, coca or cannabis plants
as well as the production, manufacture, distribution including warehousing, transport,
purchasing and selling of prohibited drugs and psychotropic substances.
It also prohibits their financing as well as consumption and harbouring offenders guilty under
the Act. The level of punishment depends not only on nature but also in quantity with a
sentence extending as long as 20 years and a fine as much as Rs.2 lakh. The act however
came under a lot of criticism for the inclusion of the death penalty in case of repeat offenders
if the quantity of drugs exceeded a certain threshold. This was however clarified with an
amendment in 2014 which established that regardless of its presence as a substitute to other
offences, the application of the death penalty is not mandatory. To reduce the burden on the
Sessions Court, matters involving an offence are heard by a special court. This has been made
possible through an amendment in 1989 which paved the way for the establishments of
special Courts for expeditious resolution of disputes. Although this legislation is essential and
was the need of the hour when it was drafted, it is not without its shortcomings.
Although drafted in consonance with International principles, it contradicts general principles

of Human Rights by presupposes the guilt of the accused and puts the onus on the accused to
prove innocence. It further states that, unless the contrary is proved, it will be believed that
the accused intentionally held the illicit drugs that were found in his possession. Apart from
being a substantive law, the NDPS has also been responsible for spreading awareness about
the ill effects of drug use. The Department of Social Welfare has been declared as the nodal
agency that monitors the initiatives undertaken by various organizations, public and private,
P a g e | 10
for spreading greater awareness about the deleterious effects of drug abuse. A central agency,
known as the Narcotics Control Bureau, is tasked with the responsibility of overseeing the
activities undertaken by various law enforcement agencies and to ensure constant compliance
with various international instruments that India has signed.
To deal with its inadequacies, a bill to amend the NDPS Act was passed by the parliament in
2014. The amendment aims to bring the Act in line with changing trends and current
International standards as opposed to when it was enacted. The amendment also include
provisions to improve treatment and care for people dependent on drugs, moving away from
abstinence oriented services to treating drug dependence as a chronic, yet manageable
condition. The highlight however is the inclusion of certain ‘essential drugs’ which pave the
way for a progressive mind-set . Although the amendment opens the way for private sector
involvement in the processing of opium and concentrated poppy straw, it remains silent on
the issue of marijuana that has been generating smoke in large sections of the International
community.
The genesis of drug control laws in India can be traced back to the Opium Act of 1857. This
was followed by the Opium Act of 1878 and the Dangerous Drugs Act of 1930. These laws
were designed to regulate and monitor the use of some specific drugs in limited contexts;
they were not based on any well-defined principles and did not contain any overarching
provisions to grapple with the problem of drug abuse in a holistic manner. Moreover, they
provided for meager punishments for their contravention which were to the tune of three
years imprisonment for the first time offenders and 4 years imprisonment for repeat
offenders. In the post World War 2 period, countries began working collectively on enacting
human rights instruments that were designed to allow individuals to live with dignity and
respect. The clearest manifestation of this general principle in the context of health can be
found in Article 25 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Article 12 of the
International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights which seek to promote the
highest attainable standards of physical and mental health. Against this backdrop, several
international instruments such as the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961 and, more
importantly, the Convention on Psychotropic Substances, 1971 unequivocally recognized the
need to put in place regulatory regimes and systems to grapple with the problem of drug
abuse. In order to bring India’s narcotics control law at par with international standards and to
effectuate the goals of these treaties, the National Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act,
P a g e | 11
1985 was enacted by the Government of India. The Act is widely regarded as a prohibitionist
law which seeks to grapple with 2 kinds of offences: trafficking of prohibited substances i.e.
cultivation, manufacture, distribution and sale, as well as their consumption.
P a g e | 12
CHAPTER I: SUBSTANCE ABUSE
Substance abuse, also known as drug abuse, is a patterned use of a drug in which the user
consumes the substance in amounts or with methods which are harmful to themselves or
others, and is a form of substance-related disorder. Widely differing definitions of drug abuse
are used in public health, medical and criminal justice contexts. In some cases criminal or
anti-social behavior occurs when the person is under the influence of a drug, and long term
personality changes in individuals may occur as well1. In addition to possible physical, social,
and psychological harm, use of some drugs may also lead to criminal penalties, although
these vary widely depending on the local jurisdiction.2
Drugs most often associated with this term include: alcohol, cannabis, barbiturates,
benzodiazepines, cocaine, methaqualone, opioids and some substituted amphetamines. The
exact cause of substance abuse is not clear, with theories including one of two: either a
genetic disposition which is learned from others, or a habit which if addiction develops, it
manifests itself as a chronic debilitating disease.3
In 2010 about 5% of people (230 million) used an illicit substance.4 Of these 27 million have
high-risk drug use otherwise known as recurrent drug use causing harm to their health,
psychological problems, or social problems or puts them at risk of those dangers. 56In 2015
substance use disorders resulted in 307,400 deaths, up from 165,000 deaths in 1990. 78 Of
these, the highest numbers are from alcohol use disorders at 137,500, opioid use disorders at
1 Ksir, Oakley Ray; Charles (2002). Drugs, society, and human behavior (9th ed.). Boston [u.a.]: McGraw-Hill.
ISBN 0072319631.
2 (2002). Mosby's Medical, Nursing & Allied Health Dictionary. Sixth Edition. Drug abuse definition, p. 552.
Nursing diagnoses, p. 2109. ISBN 0-323-01430-5.
3 "Addiction is a Chronic Disease". Retrieved 2 July 2014.
4 "World Drug Report 2012" (PDF). UNITED NATIONS. Retrieved 27 September 2016.
5 ibid
6 "EMCDDA | Information on the high-risk drug use (HRDU) (formerly 'problem drug use' (PDU)) key
indicator". www.emcdda.europa.eu. Retrieved 2016-09-27.
7 GBD 2015 Mortality and Causes of Death, Collaborators. (8 October 2016). "Global, regional, and national
life expectancy, all-cause mortality, and cause-specific mortality for 249 causes of death, 1980–2015: a
systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2015.". Lancet (London, England). 388 (10053):
1459–1544. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(16)31012-1. PMID 27733281.
8 GBD 2013 Mortality and Causes of Death, Collaborators (17 December 2014). "Global, regional, and national
age-sex specific all-cause and cause-specific mortality for 240 causes of death, 1990–2013: a systematic
analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2013.". Lancet. 385: 117–71. doi:10.1016/S0140-
6736(14)61682-2. PMC 4340604 .PMID 25530442.
P a g e | 13
122,100 deaths, amphetamine use disorders at 12,200 deaths, and cocaine use disorders at
11,100.9
Public health definitions
Drug users injecting heroin, an opiate.
Public health practitioners have attempted to look at substance use from a broader perspective
than the individual, emphasizing the role of society, culture, and availability. Some health
professionals choose to avoid the terms alcohol or drug "abuse" in favor of language they
consider more objective, such as "substance and alcohol type problems" or
"harmful/problematic use" of drugs. The Health Officers Council of British Columbia — in
their 2005 policy discussion paper, A Public Health Approach to Drug Control in Canada] —
has adopted a public health model of psychoactive substance use that challenges the
simplistic black-and-white construction of the binary (or complementary) antonyms "use" vs.
"abuse".10 This model explicitly recognizes a spectrum of use, ranging from beneficial use to
chronic dependence
Medical definitions
'Drug abuse' is no longer a current medical diagnosis in either of the most used diagnostic
tools in the world, the American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual
of Mental Disorders (DSM), and the World Health Organization's International Statistical
Classification of Diseases and ICRIS Medical organization Related Health Problems (ICD)
Substance abuse has been adopted by the DSM as a blanket term to include 10 separate
classes of drugs, including alcohol; caffeine; cannabis; hallucinogens; inhalants; opioids;
sedatives, hypnotics, and anxiolytics; stimulants; tobacco; and other substances.11 The ICD
uses the term Harmful use to cover physical or psychological harm to the user from use.
Physical dependence, abuse of, and withdrawal from drugs and other miscellaneous
substances is outlined in the DSM a:
When an individual persists in use of alcohol or other drugs despite problems related to use of
the substance, substance dependence may be diagnosed. Compulsive and repetitive use may
9 GBD 2015 Mortality and Causes of Death, Collaborators. (8 October 2016). "Global, regional, and national
life expectancy, all-cause mortality, and cause-specific mortality for 249 causes of death, 1980–2015: a
systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2015.". Lancet (London, England). 388 (10053):
1459–1544. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(16)31012-1. PMID 27733281.
10 (PDF) http://www.cfdp.ca/bchoc.pdf. Retrieved 1 April 2017.
11 American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.).
Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Publishing.
P a g e | 14
result in tolerance to the effect of the drug and withdrawal symptoms when use is reduced or
stopped.12
However, other definitions differ; they may entail psychological or physical dependence,13
and may focus on treatment and prevention in terms of the social consequences of substance
uses.
Drug misuse
Legal drugs are not necessarily safer. A 2010 study asked drug-harm experts to rank various
illegal and legal drugs. Alcohol was found to be the overall most dangerous drug.
Drug misuse is a term used commonly when prescription medication with sedative,
anxiolytic, analgesic, or stimulant properties are used for mood alteration or intoxication
ignoring the fact that overdose of such medicines can sometimes have serious adverse effects.
It sometimes involves drug diversion from the individual for whom it was prescribed.
Prescription misuse has been defined differently and rather inconsistently based on status of
drug prescription, the uses without a prescription, intentional use to achieve intoxicating
effects, route of administration, co-ingestion with alcohol, and the presence or absence of
dependence symptoms. Chronic use of certain substances leads to a change in the central
nervous system known as a 'tolerance' to the medicine such that more of the substance is
needed in order to produce desired effects. With some substances, stopping or reducing use
can cause withdrawal symptoms to occur, but this is highly dependent on the specific
substance in question.
The rate of prescription drug use is fast overtaking illegal drug use in the United States.
According to the National Institute of Drug Abuse, 7 million people were taking prescription
drugs for nonmedical use in 2010. Among 12th graders, nonmedical prescription drug use is
now second only to cannabis.[15] "Nearly 1 in 12 high school seniors reported nonmedical use
of Vicodin; 1 in 20 reported such use of OxyContin."14 Both of these drugs contain opioids.
Avenues of obtaining prescription drugs for misuse are varied: sharing between family and
friends, illegally buying medications at school or work, and often "doctor shopping" to find
12 DSM-IV & DSM-IV-TR:Substance Dependence

13 ibid
14 "Topics in Brief: Prescription Drug Abuse" NIDA, December 2011.
P a g e | 15
multiple physicians to prescribe the same medication, without knowledge of other

prescribers.
Increasingly, law enforcement is holding physicians responsible for prescribing controlled

substances without fully establishing patient controls, such as a patient "drug contract."
Concerned physicians are educating themselves on how to identify medication-seeking
behavior in their patients, and are becoming familiar with "red flags" that would alert them to
potential prescription drug abuse.
As a value judgment
Correlations between drugs usage. Correlations between usage of 18 legal and illegal drugs:
alcohol, amphetamines, amyl nitrite, benzodiazepine, cannabis, chocolate, cocaine, caffeine,
crack, ecstasy, heroin, ketamine, legal highs, LSD, methadone, magic mushrooms
(MMushrooms), nicotine and volatile substance abuse (VSA). Links indicate correlations
with absolute values of Pearson correlation coefficient r above 0.4. Medium, strong, and very
strong correlations are indicated by the colour of link.15
Philip Jenkins suggests that there are two issues with the term "drug abuse". First, what
constitutes a "drug" is debatable. For instance, GHB, a naturally occurring substance in the
central nervous system is considered a drug, and is illegal in many countries, while nicotine is
not officially considered a drug in most countries.
Second, the word "abuse" implies a recognized standard of use for any substance. Drinking
an occasional glass of wine is considered acceptable in most Western countries, while
drinking several bottles is seen as an abuse. Strict temperance advocates, who may or may
not be religiously motivated, would see drinking even one glass as an abuse. Some groups
even condemn caffeine use in any quantity. Similarly, adopting the view that any
(recreational) use of cannabis or substituted amphetamines constitutes drug abuse implies a
decision made that the substance is harmful, even in minute quantities.16 In the U.S., drugs
have been legally classified into five categories, schedule I, II, III, IV, or V in the Controlled
Substances Act. The drugs are classified on their deemed potential for abuse. Usage of some
drugs is strongly correlated. For example, the consumption of seven illicit drugs
(amphetamines, cannabis, cocaine, ecstasy, legal highs, LSD, and magic mushrooms) is
correlated and the Pearson correlation coefficient r>0.4 in every pair of them; consumption of
cannabis is strongly correlated (r>0.5) with usage of nicotine (tobacco), heroin is correlated
with cocaine (r>0.4), methadone (r>0.45), and strongly correlated with crack (r>0.5)17
15 E. Fehrman, A. K. Muhammad, E. M. Mirkes, V. Egan, A. N. Gorban,The Five Factor Model of personality

and evaluation of drug consumption risk, arXiv:1506.06297 [stat.AP], 2015
16 Philip Jenkins, Synthetic panics: the symbolic politics of designer drugs, NYU Press, 1999, ISBN 0-8147-
4244-0, pp. ix–x
17 E. Fehrman, A. K. Muhammad, E. M. Mirkes, V. Egan, A. N. Gorban,The Five Factor Model of personality
and evaluation of drug consumption risk, arXiv:1506.06297 [stat.AP], 2015
P a g e | 16
CHAPTER II: THE HISTORY OF INDIAN

LEGISLATIONS: CURBING DRUG ABUSE
Historical evidences reveal that at the end of the nineteenth century, the question of narcotic
drugs was not widely regarded as an international problem calling for concerted action
worldwide. Developments in the later part of the nineteenth century, however, gave a new
dimension to the problem. The control of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances world
wide is according to multilateral treaties concluded between 1912 and 1988. The operation of
the international system is based on national control by individual states within the limits of
their territorial jurisdiction. In compliance with stipulations of the narcotic treaties, the states
are bound to adopt appropriate legislation, introduce necessary administrative and
enforcement measures and co-operate with international control.
Historical evidences reveal that at the end of the nineteenth century, the question of narcotic
drugs was not widely regarded as an international problem calling for concerted action
worldwide. Developments in the later part of the nineteenth century, however, gave a new
dimension to the problem. The control of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances
worldwideis according to multilateral treaties concluded between 1912 and 1988. The
operation of the international system is based on national control by individual states within
the limits of their territorial jurisdiction. In compliance with stipulations of the narcotic
treaties, the states are bound to adopt appropriate legislation, introduce necessary
administrative and enforcement measures and co-operate with international control.
The Opium Act, 1857

In India, the earliest enactment on narcotic came on the statute book on 6th June, 1857 in the
shape of the Opium Act, XIII of 1857 with a view to consolidating and amending the law
relating to the cultivation of the poppy and the manufacture of opium. The Opium Act 1857,
was concerned with the issue of licenses to cultivators for the cultivation of poppy, the
delivery of produce to the officers of the Central Government at the established rate the limits
to be fixed from time to time within which such license could be issued, the fixation from
time to time of prices to be paid for the opium produced in respect of which it ensured,
through its various provisions, a central government monopoly over it. It provided for penalty
on cultivator receiving advances and not cultivating full quantity of land, penalty for
embezzlement of opium by cultivators, penalty for illegal purchase of opium from cultivator
P a g e | 17
penalty for unlicensed cultivation, penalty on officers of opium department taking bribes for
enhanced penalty and for adjudication of penalties. It fixed the duties of landholders and
others and police and other officers for giving information of illegal cultivation and provided
for the attachment in case of illegal cultivation, confiscation of adulterated opium.18
The Opium Act, 1878
The Opium Act, 1857 was followed by the Opium Act 1 of 1878. The following statements of
objects and reason of the opium bill was published in the Gazette of India 1877 Part V, page
465: “The Present Bill has the following objects:19
(1) To enable the Governor General in council to bring the Opium Act 1878 into force in
such local areas and at such respective dates as he think fit.
(2) To remove the doubts as to whether Sections 4 and 5 of that Act of the free export and
import of opium when thought desirable.
(3) To permit and regulate by rules framed under that act the form of opium duties and to
facilitates the recovery of their dues by the farmers.
(4) To correct a clerical error in section 22 of the same Act
Thus this Act sought to regulate the possession, transport export, import and sale of opium.
The prohibition of poppy cultivation and possession etc. of opium was provided in this Act. It
provided penalty for the illegal cultivation of poppy and for bond. It also provided for
warehousing of opium, confiscation of opium disposal of things confiscated and rewards
powers and procedures for entry, arrest, seizure, search etc. It also provided for presumption
in prosecution under the Act.
“The opium control legislation has its primary aim as the protection of public welfare by
preserving health, eliminating undesirable moral and social effects, commonly associated
with the indiscriminate use of this drug.”20 The court should give a liberal interpretation to
18 Vishnu Swaroop, Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act 1985, First Edition (2000), p.25. 76
19 B.R.Beotra, “Law of Drugs”, (Butterworth‟s, 2000), p.40.
20 Nalin Pad Manabham versus Sait Badrinath Sarda 3ICR 35 Madras 582
P a g e | 18
effectuate the object and purpose of such legislation. Since the effectiveness of this
legislation is dependent upon its rigid enforcement, its purpose should not be defeated by
hyper technicalities particularly when the infirmity, if any can be effectively remedied
without any injustice.
The Dangerous Drugs Act, 1930
In accordance with the resolution of the assembly of League of Nations, dated 27 September,
1923, the second international opium conference was convened at Geneva on 17th November
1924, where in a convention rating to Dangerous Drugs was adopted in 19th February 1925.
India was not only a participant to the said conference but was also a signatory to the Geneva
Convention. The contracting parties to the said convention resolved to take appropriate
measures to suppress contraband traffic and abuse of dangerous drugs especially those
derived from opium, Indian hemp and coca leaf. In order to honour their commitments the
government of India placed the Dangerous Drugs Act (II of 1930) on the statute book on 1st
March, 1930 with a view to controlling certain operations in dangerous drugs and to
centralize and vest the same in the central government. The Act also aimed at increasing
penalties for certain offences relating to dangerous drugs and to render uniform all penalties
relating to certain operations concerning such drugs. The Dangerous Drugs Act came into
force on the 1st February, 1931.21
With that object this Act provided for the exercise of control by the Central government over
the cultivation of dangerous drugs, production and supply of opium and opium derivatives,
manufacture of manufactured drugs like cocaine, morphine and other narcotic substances,
medical opium, export, import and trans-shipment of dangerous drugs. It dealt with opium,
Indian hemp and coca leaves. It also provided for penalties for various offences under the Act
for their attempts and abetments and also provided enhanced penalties ranging from a
maximum of 3 years imprisonment with or without fine to a maximum of four years
imprisonment with or without fine but no minimum punishment was provided therein. It
prescribed procedure including power to issue warrants, power of seizure and arrest in public
places. The State governments were vested with the power to invest excise officers with the
powers of an officer in charge of a Police Station. The provisions of the Sea Customs Act
1878 were made applicable.22
Apart from these three Central Acts, several state Acts namely, The Madhya Pradesh Opium
Smoking Act 1929, the Orissa Opium Smoking Act 1947, the Uttar Pradesh Opium Smoking
21 B.R.Beotra, “Law of Drugs”, (Butterworth‟s, 2000), p.42.

22 Ibid.
P a g e | 19
Act 1934, the Assam Opium Prohibition Act 1947, the Bombay Opium Smoking Act 1936,
also exercised control over the narcotic drugs.
The main legislation to control drug abuse in India namely The Narcotic Drugs and
Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (For short:NDPS Act, 1985) came into effect on 14th
November, 1985 replacing the Opium Act, 1857, the Opium Act, 1878, and the Dangerous
Drugs Act, 1930. The NDPS Act, 1985 was followed by the enactment of the Prevention of
Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1988 (For short:PITNDPS
Act, 1988). The provisions of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940, and the Prevention of
Money Laundering Act, 2002 as amended upto date, supplement the provisions of the NDPS
Act, 1985, the matter of control over manufacture and supply of some of the drugs and
forfeiture of property derived from or used in illicit traffic of such drugs and substances.
Hence, for our study, the brief sketch of following drug laws enacted in India is necessary:-
(1) The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

(2) The Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and
Psychotropic Substances Act, 1988.
(4) Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940.
CHAPTER III: THE NARCOTIC DRUGS AND

PSYCHOTROPIC SUBSTANCES ACT, 1985.
P a g e | 20
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 was enacted to consolidate and
amend the law relating to narcotic drugs, to make stringent provisions for the control and
regulation of operations relating to Narcotic drugs and Psychotropic Substances and for
matters connected therewith23.
The statutory control over narcotic drugs is exercised in India through a number of central
and State enactments. The principal Central Acts, namely the Opium Act 1857, the Opium
Act 1878 and Dangerous Drugs Act, 1930 were enacted a long time back. With the passage of
time and developments in the field of illicit drug traffic and drug abuse at national and
international level and many deficiencies in the existing law, there was an urgent need for the
enactment of a comprehensive legislation on narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances
which inter alia, should consolidate and amend the existing laws relating to narcotic drugs,
strengthen the existing control over the drugs of abuse, considerably enhance the penalties
exercising effective control over psychotropic substances and make provisions for the
implementation of inter-nation conventions relating to narcotic drugs and psychotropic
substances to which India has become a party 24. As the result, the present Act was enacted in
the year 1985. The only deficiency which was noticed by the Court in the enactment is the
absence of death penalty for an accused person found guilty of some of the offences
enumerated in it25.
The NDPS Act, 1985 has been enacted to make stringent provisions for the control and
regulation of operations relating to Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances to provide
for deterrent punishment including forfeiture of property. The Central Government is charged
with the duty of taking all such measures as it deems necessary or expedient for preventing
and combating the abuse of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances and the menace of
illicit traffic therein26.
NDPS Act, 1985 is a “Special Law”. As such various provisions incorporated in the Act
regulating procedure to be followed for offences under the Act are applicable to the exclusion
of Criminal Procedure Code, 197327.
The principal objectives behind enacting the NDPS Act, 1985 were:-
23 R.P Katria,“Law Relating to Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances in India,”Second Edition
(2005),p.1.
24 Dibyajyoti De, “Guide to Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act.” First Edition (2003), p.111.
25 Department of Central Excise (H.O.) Bombay Versus Rajesh Tulsidas Vendanti, 1989(1) MhLR 313 (Bom).
26 Raj Kumar versus Union of India AIR 1991 SC 45.
27 R.Muthu versus State 1992 (2) EFR 509(Madras).
P a g e | 21
(1) To provide for stringent punishment for the persons indulging in illicit drug trafficking as
the maximum term of imprisonment under previous Acts was for a maximum period of 3
years (4 years in case of repeat offences), and to take advantage of such laxity of law the
international drug smugglers started operating from India;
(2) To broaden the enforcement base by conferring power of investigating of drug related
offences also on a member of Central enforcement agencies like customs, central excise,
narcotic, revenue, intelligence etc. also;
(3) To fulfill the international obligations under various international treaties and conventions
to which India is a party;
(4) To bring the new drugs of addiction i.e. psychotropic substances under strict statutory
control in the manner as envisaged in the Convention on Psychotropic Substances 1971
which has been acceded to by India in 1975.
The NDPS Act, 1985 came into force on the 14th November, 1985. It had originally six
chapters with 83 sections but two new chapters i.e. Chapter II-A and V-A were inserted later
on by the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (Amendment) Act, 1988 with effect
from the 29th May, 1989. Chapter I of the NDPS Act, 1985 deals with the short title and
definitions.
Chapter II relates to the appointment of authorities and officers who are to exercise powers
and perform various functions under the Act. The Central Government shall take the
measures which it thinks necessary to prevent and combat abuse of narcotic drugs and
psychotropic substances and the illicit traffic therein28. The Central Government shall appoint
a Narcotics Commissioner and may also appoint such other officers with such designations as
it thinks fit for the purpose of the Act to exercise all powers and perform all functions relating
to the superintendence of the cultivation of the opium poppy and production of opium and
shall also exercise and perform such other powers and functions as may be entrusted by the
Central Government29. The Central Government may constitute “The Narcotic Drugs and
Psychotropic Substances Consultative Committee” to advise the Central Government on such
matters relating to the administration of act as are referred to it by that Government from time
to time. The committee shall consist of a Chairman and such other members not exceeding
28 Section 4 of the NDPS Act, 1985.

P a g e | 22
twenty30. The State Government may also appoint such officers as it thinks fit for the purpose
of this Act31.
Chapter II-A deals with constitution of national fund called as “National Fund for Control of
Drug Abuse.” The sale proceeds of any property forfeited under Chapter VA are to be credited
in that fund32. The fund is to be utilized by the Central Government to meet the expenditure in
combating drug abuse and illicit trafficking.
Chapter III of the Act contains prohibitions relating to the cultivation of coca plant, opium
poppy and cannabis plants and the production, manufacture, possession, sale, purchase,
transport, warehouse, use, consumption, import inter-state, export inter-state, import into
India, export from India or tranship any narcotic drug or psychotropic substance. The
prohibition does not apply to the aforesaid operations for medical or scientific purposes. The
export of poppy straw for decorative purposes is not prohibited 33. Section 8-A of the Act
prohibits certain activities relating to property derived from offence. The Central Government
has power to permit, control or regulate it 34. If the Central Government is of opinion that,
having regard to the use of any controlled substance in the production or manufacture of any
narcotic drug or psychotropic substance, it is necessary or expedient so to do in the public
interest, it may, by order, provide for regulating or prohibiting the production, manufacture,
supply and distribution thereof and trade and commerce therein35.
Narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances etc. are not liable to distress or attachment by
any person for the recovery of any money under any order or decree of any court or authority
or otherwise36. External dealing in narcotic drugs and psychotropic substance is prohibited
except with previous authorization of the Central Government and subject to such conditions
as may be imposed by that Government in this behalf37. The cultivation of any coca plant etc.
or gathering of any portion thereof or the production, possession, sale, purchase, transport,
import inter-state, export inter-state, or import into India of coca leaves for use in the

32 Section 7-A of the NDPS Act, 1985.

35 Section 9-A of the NDPS Act, 1985.
P a g e | 23
preparation of any flavouring agent which shall not contain any alkaloid and to the extent
necessary for such use can be permitted by the Central Government 38. The Central
Government may allow cultivation of any cannabis plant for industrial purposes only for
obtaining fiber or seed or for horticulture purposes by general or special order and subject to
such conditions as may be specified in such order39.
Chapter IV deals with offences and penalties and defines the offences under the Act and
prescribes the penalties for the same. The NDPS Act, 1985 was enacted under the impression
that stringent punishments like rigorous imprisonment for a minimum of ten years would
effective deter those indulging in illicit trafficking in drugs. The Amendment Act 9 of 2001,
which came into force on 2.10.2001, overhauled Chapter IV relating to 'offences and
penalties'. Prior to 2001 amendment, only one category of sentence was prescribed for each
kind of offence. Now all the offences have been divided into three categories i.e. Small
quantity, in between small quantity and commercial quantity (may be called medium
quantity) and commercial quantity40.
The amended Act of 2001 grades punishments in following three categories depending on the
quantity of drugs seized.
(a) Where the contravention involves small quantity, attracts rigorous imprisonment for a
term which may extend to six months, or with fine which may extend to ten thousand rupees
or with both;
(b) Where the contravention involves quantity lesser than commercial but greater than small
quantity (may be called medium quantity), is punishable with rigorous imprisonment for a
term which may extend to ten years and with fine which may extend to one lakh rupees;
(c) Where the contravention involves commercial quantity, is punishable with rigorous
imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than ten years but which may extend to
twenty years and shall also liable to fine which shall not less than one lakh rupees but which
may extend to two lakh rupees. The Court has power to impose a fine exceeding two lakh
rupees by recording reasons in the judgment.

40 Section 15 to 40 of the NDPS Act, 1985.
P a g e | 24
Small and commercial quantity for various drugs have been notified by the Central
Government vide Notification No.77/2001 dated 19.10.2001/S.O. 1055 (E) dated
19.10.2011. The details of some of the important drugs for the purpose of this research are
given as under:-
Sr.No. Drug/Psychotropic Small Quantity Commercial

Substance Quantity
1. Poppy straw 1 kg 50 kgs
2. Ganja 1 kg 20 kgs
3. Opium 25 gms 2.5 kgs.
4 Cannabis 100 gms 1 kg.
5. Cocaine 2 gms 100 gms.
6. Heroine 5 gms 250 gms.
7. Codeine 10 gms 1 kg
8. Opium Derivatives 5 gms 250 gms
9. Diazepam 20 gms 500 gms
10. Morphine 5 gms 250 gms
CHAPTER IV: EFFECTIVENESS OF THE ACT

Drug abuse is a social evil. It destroys not only vitals of the society but also
adversely affects the economic growth of the country because this is a trade which generates
large un-accounted money which, in turn, leads to adoption of several means of money
laundering. The money generated is used for various purposes including anti-national and
terrorist activities and even clandestine trading in arms and ammunition. Drug trafficking
P a g e | 25
activities have sharply increased over the years and unscrupulous persons dealing in drugs
have flourished despite hard punishments provided under the law because they have been
able to evade the process of law.
Just as any virus, use of drugs and drug trafficking knows no bonds or limitations. It spreads
all over a country; from nation to nation; to the entire globe infecting every civilized society
irrespective of caste, creed, culture and the geographical location.
Looking back at time, many of you may recollect that the edict of the Chinese Government in
1800 AD prohibiting import of opium as it constituted a threat to the health of the Chinese
people resulted in the infamous Opium War in the name of right of free trade. European
powers organised massive smuggling of the substance into China which was resisted by the
Chinese resulting in the Opium War.
As early as in 1917, Mahatma Gandhi while addressing the All India Social Service
Conference in Calcutta, had said :
“The cocaine habit was sapping the nation’s manhood, and that
like the drink habit, it was on the increase in its effect more
deadly than drink.”
Unfortunately, the kingpins and the carriers of these drugs at the international and national
level are concerned with only large undue financial gains and not with massive ill effects of
use of drugs on society. In recent times, there has been significant development of the
communication systems and means of transportation. This has also led to considerable
increase in Narcotics drug trafficking. The drug traffickers have been able to flourish despite
stringent punishments provided under the ‘Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act’.
They are able to evade the process of law and cause great harm to the social and economic
growth of the country and particularly the young generation. This resulted in seriously
hampering the socio-economic growth and multi-dimensional development of the country.
The punishment for drug trafficking became more and more stringent by the passage of time,
but it has not been able to provide real solution to the basic problem.
Today, world opinion and effort is united in fighting illicit production, trade and trafficking in
drugs as the view is unanimous, that its effects are disastrous.
P a g e | 26
In recognition of the need to globally check the menace and for international cooperation for
investigation, chasing the offenders, prevention and punishment, countries across the globe
have joined hands and subscribed to conventions and conclaves convened under the aegis of
the United Nations. India is also a party to the United Nations Single Convention on Narcotic
Drugs, 1961 and the U.N. Protocol, 1972 amending the Single Convention and the U.N.
Convention on Psychotropic Substances, 1971. The United Nations Convention against illicit
trafficking in Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances which was held in Vienna, Austria
in 1988 was perhaps one of the first international effort to take action against the illegal
proceeds of drug trafficking throughout the comity of nations and manifested the desirability
of mutual legal assistance between Member States to deal with the menace so as to provide
for confiscation of the moneys and for extradition of the offenders. The Government of India
has ratified the Convention.
India has long recognised the problems of drug trafficking and abuse. The Opium Act of
1857, and of 1878 and the Dangerous Drugs Act, 1930 manifest the same. As a result of
experience gained on account of India’s participation in various international conventions and
realising gravity of the problem and the need to enact laws in tune with times, the Narcotic
Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act of 1985 was passed by Indian Parliament as a
comprehensive legislation on narcotics, providing for stringent and long term prison
sentences and heavy fines for offenders. Offender under this Act includes the cultivator,
supplier, seller as well as the drug consumer. Bail provisions were made very stringent. The
minimum sentence is ten years. The amended Drugs and Cosmetics Act and Rules also
provide for deterrent punishment and stringent control over manufacture, sale, distribution of
psychotropic substances. Despite these measures, the crime is on rise.
The criticism levelled against NDPS Act is that it treats the drug user and trafficker on par.
The Government has fixed the quantity possessed for personal use as an offence and provided
a punishment for possession of quantities beyond such limits. One of the criticism to this
provision brought by way of amendment is that the quantity fixed is so small that it may not
suffice for even a single use and that such provisions make it difficult for drug addicts to
openly seek medical help and rehabilitation. It is also said that one of the cause of low
conviction rate is the steep minimum sentence under the Act. How far these are relevant to
ultimately check the problem of Drug Trafficking is for experts to examine.
P a g e | 27
Stringent laws and severe punishments have been able to control the menace to some extent
but still it is one of the most pertinent threats in the progress of any developing country. Do
we need comprehensive legislative changes or is there need of implementation of existing
laws with greater precision and concerted effort by all concerned to resolve this issue? Laxity
or pathetic attitude from any quarter in dealing with this issue is bound to prove disastrous
for the society. All departments of the State are expected to work in unison and with utmost
coordination to give an impressive display of the will to control, if not, completely eliminate
this evil from the society.
Before I make a brief mention of some data, let me broadly state the issue according
to my perception. The persons involved in drug cases, primarily fall in four categories. First
category of persons are those who produce these drugs; second are the kingpin who procure
from the producers and deal in trade of drugs at a large scale; third are the carriers; and in the
fourth would fall the consumers, namely drug addicts.
Experts, I am confident, would consider whether all deserve to be similarly treated or

differently. Take the example of carriers. For tackling the problem, should carriers deserve to
be similarly treated as those falling in first and second category? Take also the example of
drug addicts. Do they not need different treatment? Is it not a disease as far as they are
concerned? Do they not deserve to be treated with love and compassion as a part of treatment
of their ailment? These are some of the questions which I have posed on which the experts in
this Seminar may focus their attention. Let us now see some facts and figures. In a national
survey conducted by the Ministry of Social Justice and Environment and the United Nations
Office of Drugs and Crimes, it was stated that abuse of different drugs is prevalent in
different states of India. Rajasthan, has the highest proportion of opium users (76.7%),
followed by Haryana (58.0%). So far as heroin is concerned, 43.9% of its users are found in
Uttar Pradesh while Orissa and Himachal Pradesh, at 43.9% and 37.3% respectively top in
alcohol consumption. This indicates not only the dimension and diversity of the social
problem that is facing our country, but also that the problem does not relate only to
investigation and law in relation to drug abuse and drug-related crimes.
The statistics released by the Narcotic Bureau also indicate the magnitude of the problem
facing our nation. Let us see last ten years track record. From the year 1996-2006, amongst
others 21895 kgs of Opium, 855667 kgs of Ganja, 48278 kgs of hashish and 10147 kgs of
heroin have been seized by various enforcing agencies. In the cases arising from these
P a g e | 28
seizures, a total of 142337 persons were involved including the foreigners. Out of these,
38030 persons stand convicted for offences while 44656 persons have been acquitted. The
rate of acquittal has, varied from 27.7% to 59.1% annually during this period.
In its annual press conference, the Central Jail, Tihar, indicated that amongst the undertrials
and convicts (both male and female) arrested under the NDPS Act, there are 10.70 % male
undertrials and 5.37% male convicts and 16.12% female undertrials and 13.28% female
convicts. There are nearly 340 NGOs run or aided by the Ministry of Social Justice and
Empowerment, Government of India, to take reformative and remedial steps. Increase in de-
addiction centres is an encouraging step taken by the concerned authorities.
The Narcotics Control Bureau was set up in May 1986 as a primary enforcement agency to
deal exclusively with drugs. This high powered body which is controlled by a Director
General has direct liaison with the United Nations Narcotics Control Bureau and other
international agencies working against drug trafficking. A number of the other enforcement
agencies have been provided effective support with the Narcotics Control Bureau acting as a
nodel agency to enforce the law which includes the central excise, customs, border security
force, CBI, Directorate of Revenue Intelligence and Food and Drug Control officers. For the
first time in the history of the country, all concerned that is the prosecuting agencies, the
legislature, the judiciary, scientists, eminent persons from various walks of life as well as
students from various schools have been brought together to participate in this national level
Seminar-cum-Workshop. Their varied experiences and knowledge would form a special
thought process for evolving a system to implement programmes which are in the interest of
administration of criminal justice and would serve a public purpose of high order. When
crime goes unpunished, the criminal is encouraged while the society suffers. The criminal
justice delivery system is already under immense pressure and needs better support. The
criminal and the victim both need succour rehabilitation and support. The statistical data
furnished by different authorities suggests that the various limbs of the State administration
involved in this field, have to show much better co-ordination; the investigation has to be
scientific and techniques need large scale improvements. Witnesses turn hostile during trial
and lack of proper application of law by concerned authorities are amongst others the few
causes for high rate of acquittals.
The situation needs remedial measures at once so that rule of law and effectiveness of the
criminal justice delivery system are not only maintained but improved. The rate of acquittals
P a g e | 29
is a matter of great concern as it elucidates the gap between the investigation and the law. As
an illustration, take position in Delhi. There are six courts of Session Judges dealing with the
cases under the NDPS Act. During the period August 2003 to 2005, in 1938 cases- challans
were filed, out of which 875 have been disposed of. Out of these, there were 479 convictions,
while 391 cases ended in acquittal and in 12 cases the accused persons were discharged. This
itself shows that we need to take multi-dimensional steps to improve the quality of
investigation as well as increase effectiveness of criminal justice delivery system. It also
underlines the fact that justice can be delivered only when there is total support by an
effective and efficient investigation and administration.
The topics for discussion, on this Workshop-cum-Training Programme provide provocative

mental exercises to discern find a solution to this cataclysm. Every limb of the State
administration has to play a definite and pragmatic role to achieve the object underlying the
provisions of the NDPS Act and the social cause behind it. Functional and administrative
improvements are called for in every sphere and at every stage so as to avoid unnecessary
harm to the society at large. Drug trafficking, trading and its use, affects the economic
policies of the State, corrupts the systems and destroys the future of the country. More
clearly, defining the powers, role and the response required by and from a particular agency
of the State would be another aspect to be considered by the investigation and scientific,
experts and legal luminaries attending this programme. They should define with greater
clarity the drug related legislative framework within which police or other agencies should
optimally operate and define the levels of discretion, they ought to exercise within that
framework. No single agency should be held responsible for unenforceable legislation or not
exercising discretion within the prescribed framework, where it is not clearly indicated.
To emphasize the need for providing a panacea to this problem while preventing
retrogression of socio-economic values all over the world, I would refer to the observations
of the Supreme Court of Canada in the case of United States of America versus Cotroni :-
“The investigation, prosecution and suppression of crime for

the protection of the citizen and the maintenance of peace and
public order is an important goal of all organized societies. The
pursuit of that goal cannot realistically be confined within
national boundaries.”
P a g e | 30
Whatever be the origin or source of drug abuse, this deadly practice gravely affects the most
productive and dynamic section of our society, that is the age group between 15-40. There is,
thus, inestimable loss to the social, economic and cultural life of the people and to wealth of
the nation. Drug abuse has been identified as playing a significant part in the spread of
diseases like AIDS.
Drug problems are part of the larger problems of disease, poverty, unemployment, violence,
economic disparity and styles of living. The consequential creations of a growing population
of victims of drug abuse and addiction who have to be not only help wean off this habit but
also brought back into mainstream living.
It is heartening to note that various wings of the State administration from all over the
country are participating in this seminar not to find fault with the others but to participate in
this Seminar-cum-Workshop programme as a joint venture to outline corrective measures,
perfect investigative mechanisms and aim towards expeditious and effective judicial
pronouncements to ensure punishment to the guilty and prevention and control of drug
trafficking. This would certainly help in achieving the object of the common goal of such
national importance and public welfare. A note of caution, that while guilty has to be
punished and stringent punishment inflicted but at the same time it is equally necessary to
ensure that innocent are not involved by taking undue advantage of stringent provisions of
the Act.
Healthy discussion, brain storming and sharing of ideas brings out clearly errors and
weaknesses which hitherto may be hidden and obscure to the light of reason and render them
clearer for ameliorating or improving or substituting any existing system. Inconvenient points
of view receive appreciation in their correct perspective, lead to a path of solution, which
normally may sound impossible to achieve. One of the cardinal principles of any civilized
jurisprudence is to remove the cause of litigation and eliminate heinous crimes from society.
To find the cause of a cause which causes the things caused is the responsibility of all
concerned without exception. A variety of reasons could be stated for the repeated errors at
different levels, but to really get to the root of the defects in the system and society should be
the basic aim of this programme so as to control the production, supply, trafficking and
consumption of this noxious substance. Towards achievement of such end, we may listen to
critics because often they are good source of information for what you have to do differently.
P a g e | 31
Democracy essentially includes social democracy which means a way of life with
monumental liberty, equality and fraternity as the principles of life. Such liberty cannot be
divorced from economic democracy. The widespread evil of drug trafficking not only creates
shackles on these principles but leads to a complete impediment in the progress of the
country in various fields. The expression ‘reason to believe’ in the context of a provision of
NDPS Act has been a matter of great legal controversy. It does not mean a purely subjective
satisfaction on the part of the concerned officer while he has to search a suspect carrying
drugs, it has to be a belief in good faith and not on a mere pretence. The provisions of
Sections 42 and 50 have been subjected to the principle of statutory interpretation by various
decisions of the Supreme Court including that of a Constitution Bench in the case of State of
Punjab v. Baldev Singh [(1999) 6 SCC 172]. Some of the difficulties in investigation and
prosecution of such offences and conflicts in judicial pronouncements were taken note of by
the then Chief Justice of India while resolving issues and speaking for the Constitution Bench
of the Supreme Court.
CONCLUSION
Drug abuse is some form or other is a universal phenomenon. India is also not an exception.
The traditional drugs of abuse in India have been herbal Cannabis and Opium which were
available in restricted quantities from licensed shop till recently. As long as drug addiction
was confined to certain types of individuals and the problem was managed by the informal
P a g e | 32
mechanism of social control. But the situation has changed dramatically in last two decades
because of the steady increase in the clandestine demands for hard drugs like Heroin and
Concentrated Cannabis in the affluent Western Countries which have led to the development
of illicit conversion of opium into Heroin in the clandestine laboratories in “Golden Triangle”
and “Golden Crescent”. Hashish production was increased in Nepal and India’s geographical
location soon made it as a conduit for transit of these drugs from the aforesaid source
countries to Europe, America and other countries.
While concluding this research, researcher summarizes the findings of every chapter. After
analyzing chapter 1, the researcher concludes that the problem of drug addiction has become
a great menace in the recent years, posing a serious challenge to all those who want to see a
good society. In the contemporary world drug addiction may be conceptualized as crime,
without victim, i.e. addict himself is the victim, who become a prey of its misuse. This
devastating melody is eroding the roots of social, economic and cultural fabrics of Indian
society. It leads to criminality and criminal behavior which eventually leads to social
disorganization.
The worldwide control of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances rests upon multilateral
treaties concluded between 1912 and 1988. The international control mechanism is
functioning under the auspices of United Nations and one specialized administrative organ,
the International Narcotics Control Board (INCB), which is charged particularly with the
supervision of provisions of Narcotic treaties. In International perspective various
conventions were held being The Hague Convention 1912, The Geneva Convention 1925,
Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs 1961, Convention on Psychotropic Substances 1971
and lastly convention against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances,
1988 held only with the objectives to combat with the problem of drug abuse in the world and
to suggest necessary measures and guidelines to control the same but still the results which
were expected in international sphere have not come and drug trafficking problem is still
going on which has caused great loss to the public particularly the youth.
The anti-drug abuse legislations were also formulated by individual states being USA, UK as
well as India. The main legislation to control drug abuse in India namely the NDPS Act, 1985
came into effect on 14th November, 1985 replacing the Opium Act, 1857, The Opium Act,
1878 and The Dangerous Drugs Act, 1930. The earlier Acts were mainly regulatory and
restrictive in character and failed to achieve the desired results keeping in view the alarming
P a g e | 33
increase of drug abuse in India. This Act was further amended in form of Prevention of Illicit
Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1988(PITNDPS Act). Under the
NDPS Act, 1985 an express provision was made for constituting a central authority for the
purpose of exercising power and functions of the Central Government namely “Narcotic
Control Bureau”, which exercises the power and function of the Central Government. The
recent amendment i.e. NDPS (amendment) Act, 2001 is yet another legislative attempt to iron
out the anomalies and to remove the technical snags. The Supreme Court of India has also
appreciated the role of Indian Parliament for introducing effective provisions in NDPS Act.41
Both developed and developing countries have fallen an easy prey to this illegitimate activity
of the international criminal syndicates dealing with drug trafficking. India is both a producer
as well as important transit country for these substances. Many states in the Indian union are
considered to be highly vulnerable for the trafficking of these substances and in this regard,
the State of Jammu and Kashmir has become highly famous for its involvement in the
production of charas and also smuggling of drugs like heroin across the line of actual control
for onward transmission to different world destinations. Illicit trafficking in drugs in the
country has also assumed alarming position in the North and North-Eastern states. Drug
abuse problem also exists at work place, Universities and even in the lower strata of the
society. Stringent laws and severe punishment have been able to control the menace to some
extent but still it is one of the most pertinent threats in the progress of any developing
country.
In Chapter-II, the researcher has examined the problem of Use and Misuse of Drugs in India
and what are the drugs of misuse in India and their effect on the society and which
mechanism is to be developed for controlling and prevention of drug addiction.
Drugs by definition are substances having physiological and psychological effects on human
beings and other higher animals. However, these drugs are often misused for their non-
therapeutic properties to cause a change in mood, get away from the real world, and many a
times, even to end one’s life.
June 26 is celebrated as International Day against Drug Abuse and Illicit Trafficking every
year. It is an exercise undertaken by the world community to sensitize the people in general
and the youth in particular, to the menace of drugs. Therefore, drug addiction is a social
problem, caused by multiple factors. People take drugs for many reasons, peer pressure, relief
41 Durand Didier v. Chief Secretary, Union Territory of Goa (1989) 1.AIR
P a g e | 34
of stress, increased energy, to relax, to relieve pain, to escape reality, to feel more self-esteem
and for recreation. They may take stimulants to keep alert or cocaine for the feeling of
excitement, it produces. Athletes and many body builders may take anabolic steroid to
increase muscle-mass. Drug addiction is a behavior whose manifestation depends upon the
complex drug-individual-society relationship. Diverse social factors which are variable in
point of time and geography determine to a very great extent drug abuse. For the same
reasons there are variations in the laws on drug abuse control from country to country. A law
is made to subserve particular purpose in a particular social milieu. The variance in legal
regulations from state to state concerned with the problem of drug abuse creates a lot of
confusion in legal circle.
The worst aspect of the drug addiction is that it makes its deepest impression on those who
are most vulnerable youth. Because of their inmate curiosity and thrust for new experiences,
the young are particularly susceptible to drug experience. When a substantial percentage of
any generation is addicted, the generation has to loose contributing citizens and acquires a
crippling social burden. The insidious spread of drug addiction in rural communities has
posed a serious challenge to the authorities.
Drug addiction has deep familiar concerns. The wide spread abuse of drugs; a human tragedy
has a devastating effect on family be it parents, children or other relations. It causes
disruption and disharmony within the family and every family member to suffer criminal
behavior creeps in the family automatically. Parents cannot often face the fact that their
children takes the drug or attribute their deviant behavior to something the parents did or did
not do in bringing up the child. Shame and embarrassment far too often prevent them from
acknowledging their child’s drug habit. In failing to confront the drug problem, they cannot
held the child, find the courage and the appropriate means to stop taking drugs.
There are severe social implications of drug addiction. Societies pay a heavy tool for drug
addiction. Most of the world drug users are 18 to 35 years of age and are working persons.
They carry their drug taking behaviour to the work place, generating a number of serious
problems including low production, loss of machinery, continuous absence from the work and
increase health care expenses. Now, it is high time for the politicians and the social scientists
to understand the problem, analyze it and find remedies for the same.
P a g e | 35
After analyzing the historical background, the researcher in this Chapter has analyzed the
adverse effects of the drugs namely opium and its derivatives, cocaine, alcohol, sedatives,
ganja (cannabis), anabolic steroids, tranquilizers, inhalants, Caffeine/Nicotine etc. which not
only destroyed the health of individual but caused damage to the entire fabric of the society.
The major causes of drug addiction are psychological, differential association, continuing
stressful life, physical necessity and easy availability of drug etc. In Prevention and Control
of drug abuse, role of parents, teachers, family etc. cannot be ignored. Various policies have
been made for prevention and control of drug addiction and efforts for its prevention at
community level, family level, college level have been made. Prevention programs at work
place have been started. Drug prevention centres have been opened in colleges and work
places for proper counselling of drug addicts and to provide strong motivation and guidance
to the drug addicts. Despite all these efforts, the drug addiction has been reduced to some
extent but this problem in India is still alarming as youth of India has become addicts to the
drugs which requires immediate attention of the Centre and the States as well as non-
governmental organizations (NGOs) working in this field.
The main task behind policy and action regarding the drug trafficking requires efforts not
only to control supplies of drugs but also to reduce demand for drugs. Prevention, treatment
and rehabilitation all requires a positive and live affirming campaign. Persuasion, motivation,
coercion, compulsion and punishment are the major, all of which have to be used that drug
abusers can be made to resist the temptation for drugs and leave a wholesome drug free life.
Here families and voluntary organizations also can play an important role in bringing back
the recovered addicts into the mainstream of social life.
At the international level, the United Nations adopted a global programme of action in 1990
to be implemented at the national, regional and global levels. Besides focusing on enhanced
communication, more effective exchange of information and renewed commitment on the
parts of the governments it has suggested four specific measures to be adopted. First,
prevention should become an integral element of drug control efforts worldwide. Second,
multidimensional drug control programme involving all sections of government and society
should be formed. Third, the international drug control treaties should be ratified and
implemented as the basis of a global framework of co-operation. These treaties can provide a
legal foundation for effective drug control co-operation. Lastly regional partnership involving
P a g e | 36
neighbouring governments should be used as effective mechanism for containing the illicit
drug problem. Drug abuse thus can be contained only through cooperation and dedicated
efforts.
Finally, it can be concluded that drug addiction is a problem which requires an integrated
efforts by various actors namely Government, NGOs, IGOs, social organizations and
societies as a whole to check the problem and its adverse effect. A deep and rationale inquiry
into the causes of the drug addiction is the need of the hour. The social behavior towards the
drug addict should be changed and they should be given the therapeutic treatment. The laws
should be relooked and redefined taking strict stand towards drug abusers and peddlers and
drug addict should be treated as a victim, not a culprit.
In Chapter-III, the researcher has given brief introduction of all the existing drug laws in
India after giving some historical background of drug abuse legislations. The researcher
concludes that in India, the earliest enactment on narcotics came on the statute book on 6th
June, 1857 in the shape of the Opium Act, 1857. This Act was followed by the Opium Act,
1878 which sought to regulate the possession, transport, export, import and sale of opium.
The prohibition of poppy cultivation and possession etc. of opium was provided in this Act.
Thereafter, the Dangerous Drugs Act, 1930 came in existence in order to honour the
international commitment with a view to controlling certain operations in dangerous drugs.
Subsequently, the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 and the Drugs (Control) Act, 1950 were
enacted and considered as steps in the direction of suppressing the traffic of contraband and
the abuse of dangerous drugs.
The main legislation to control the drug abuse in India namely the NDPS Act, 1985 was
passed replacing the Opium Act, 1857, the Opium Act, 1878 and the Dangerous Drugs Act,
1930. The NDPS Act, 1985 was followed by the enactment of the Prevention of Illicit Traffic
in the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1988. The provisions of the Drugs
and Cosmetics Act, 1940 and the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 as amended
upto date, supplement the provisions of the NDPS Act, 1985, in the matter of control over
manufacture and supply of some of the drugs and forfeiture of property derived from or used
in illicit traffic of such drugs and substances. On appreciation of all these drug laws in India,
it can be concluded that the legislative mechanism to control the drug abuse in India is
sufficient but it is the implementation level which requires more efforts to combat this evil.
P a g e | 37
In Chapter-IV, the researcher has analyzed the role of enforcement agencies in the
enforcement of Drug Laws in India. General enforcement of the provisions of NDPS Act,
1985, is looked after by various enforcement agencies like Custom and Central Excise, State
Police, Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI), Central Bureau of Narcotics (CBN),
Narcotic Control Bureau, Central Bureau of Investigation etc. Para-Military Forces like BSF,
CISF, Coast Guards etc. are also required to play an important role in tackling smuggling of
drugs. The NDPS Act,1985 came into effect from 14th November, 1985 made an expressed
provision for constituting a Central authority for the purpose of exercising the power and
function of Central Government under the Act. In exercise of the powers, the “Narcotic
Control Bureau” was constituted which is the Apex Coordinating Agency.
The major responsibility for controlling street level peddling and trafficking falls upon the
state enforcement agencies, particularly the police. A periodic drives have been launched by
the police agencies in the States to combat narcotic menace.
The Local police has played a great role in drug cases as most of the cases are being
investigated by the local police. Generally public witnesses are reluctant to join the
investigation and in lacking of independent corroboration, the accused are being acquitted by
the Courts at different levels. This approach of the Court was not appreciated by Apex Court
and gave a note of caution to the Courts while appreciating the role of local police 42. The
Supreme Court of India in latest various judgments has adopted pragmatic approach in
dealing with the investigation of these cases by the investigating agency as now a days it is
very difficult to join independent witness due to non-cooperation of general public. In another
judgment43 it was held that generally the public at large are reluctant to come forward to
depose before the court and therefore, the prosecution case cannot be doubted for non-
examining the independent witnesses. There is no absolute rule that police officers cannot be
cited as witnesses and their depositions should be treated with suspect and conviction of the
accused was upheld on the basis of the statements of police official witnesses. It may be
concluded that statements of police official witnesses could not be discarded only on the
ground that no independent witness was joined where their depositions are trustworthy and
reliable.
In this manner, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has given healthy sign to the enforcement
agencies as regards the investigation of drug cases because if the cases are investigated by the
42 NCT of Delhi v. Sunil and Ors. (2001) 1 SCC 652
43 Ram Swaroop v. State (Govt. of NCT) of Delhi 2013 Cri.L.J. 2997
P a g e | 38
police in a fair and proper manner, then their evidence cannot be disbelieved only on the
ground that no independent witness was joined. The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) is
also the premier investigating police agency in India. CBI as an organization is held in high
esteem by the Supreme Court, the High Courts, the Parliament and the public. The CBI has to
investigate major crimes in the country having inter-state and international ramifications
besides collecting criminal intelligence pertaining to three main areas of operations, viz. anti-
corruption, economic crimes and special crimes. This agency also deals with cases of large
scale smuggling of narcotics.
The researcher in Chapter-IV has further analyzed the role of Directorate of Revenue
Intelligence, Custom Authorities, Enforcement Directorate and Security Forces. The
Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) primarily undertakes all the aspects of work
pertaining to Customs, Central Excise and Narcotics. No doubt, the Courts at various
occasions while dealing with the cases wherein investigation was conducted by the Officers
of DRI cautioned them for leaving lacunae but still it can be concluded that role of this
agency is very important as the same is dealing with anti-narcotic laws in an effective manner
most of the times.
Indian customs, not only tackles drug trafficking at the borders but is also mandated to fight
this menace within the country. The Indian customs has been in the forefront of fight against
drug trafficking. The networking of Indian customs with other agencies in India and in
foreign countries has resulted in interception a large number of drug consignments and action
against prominent drug traffickers both within India and abroad. It actively encourages the
informers to provide intelligence about drug trafficking. The custom authorities recovered
huge quantity of hashish and documents. The Enforcement Directorate (ED) undertakes to
enforce Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 and Prevention of Money Laundering Act,
2002 and to attach and confiscate property involved in the Act of Money Laundering. The
security forces like Border Security Force (BSF), Indian Coast Guard and CISF have played
role in making recovery of contrabands at borders and during security of airports etc. In order
to combat the problem of drug abuse, international cooperation in the field is also necessary.
India has been endeavouring to enter into bilateral agreements with like-minded countries in
the matter of combating illicit traffic in drugs in view of 1988 UN Convention. India has
signed extradition treaties, mutual legal assistance agreements and other specific agreements
to combat terrorism and organized crime. Besides, international coordination, the national
coordination of various agencies of control and state governments with regard to the drug
P a g e | 39
laws enforcement in the country is essential. It may be concluded that the enforcement
agencies must take a note of legal directions given by various courts while discussing the role
of investigating agencies pertaining to compliance of mandatory provisions and other
provisions of the NDPS Act, particularly Sections 41, 42, 50, 52, 55 and 57. Despite some
lacunae in investigation of cases, still the role of these enforcement agencies is laudable and
has been appreciated even by the courts from time to time.
In Chapter-V, Judicial Response in Drug Laws Enforcement has been analyzed by the
researcher by discussing penal policy as enumerated in NDPS Act. NDPS Act, 1985 stands
out from all other socio-economic legislature due to incorporation of various provisions
prescribing harsh punishments. There is a minimum of 10 years rigorous imprisonment and a
fine of one lac rupees prescribed as punishment for various offences making the punishments
as strict as possible. But due to grave misuse of the provisions, amendment has been made in
2001 which divides the whole offences into three categories, one where the particular offence
involves commercial quantity, second which involves a small quantity and third offence
which involves quantities less than commercial but more than small quantity. The offences
and penalties enumerated under NDPS Act have been discussed in this chapter. The Judicial
Response in Drug Laws Enforcement in India, has been analyzed critically by the researcher
under the following heads:-
(i) Recovery of contraband, search and seizure
(ii) Mandatory provisions: Non-compliance thereof and effects
(iii) Samples and FSL reports
(iv) Independent witness
(v) Juvenile Offenders under NDPS Act
(vi) Bail
(vii) Forfeiture of property derived from or used in illicit traffic under the NDPS Act.
It is necessary that search and seizure as well as recovery of contraband are to be made by an
authorized person and compliance of Sections 41 and 42 of the NDPS Act are mandatory.
Non-compliance thereof would vitiate the search and seizure of the contraband. No such
P a g e | 40
requirement as contemplated under Sections 41 and 42 is applicable where such empowered

officer is conducting search and seizure in public place.44
A Three judge bench of the apex court held 45 that if keeping in view the urgency and the
grounds of information and reasons thereof cannot be recorded, the empowered officer can
affect search and seizure and such breach of Sections 41 and 42 of the NDPS Act would not
affect the case at all.
The expression reason to believe in the context of a provision of NDPS Act has been a matter
of great legal controversy. It does not mean a purely subjective satisfaction on the part of the
concerned officer while he has to search a suspect carrying drugs, it has to be a belief in good
faith and not on a mere pretense. The provisions of Sections 42 and 50 have been subjected to
the principle of statutory interpretation by various decisions of the Supreme Court including
that of a Constitution Bench held in a judgment 46 that compliance of Section 50 of the NDPS
Act is mandatory and search and seizure made in violation thereof is illegal. Under Section
50 of the Act, it is a legal right of the accused to be apprised by the investigating agency as to
whether he wants to be searched before a Gazetted Officer or a Magistrate and it is not a mere
formality.
It has been observed by the Apex Court as well as various High Courts that notice under
Section 50 of the Act is mandatory in personal search and further, the accused are being
acquitted on minor technical grounds. There had been difference of opinion whether
requirement of Section 50 should be applicable when a bag or other container found on the
person of an accused during the course of search being conducted. This matter has been
considered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in a case47, a bench of three learned
Judges held that provisions of Section 50 will come into play only in case of personal search
of the accused and not of some baggage like a bag, article or container etc. which he may be
carrying. In this manner, the Supreme Court of India curtailed the extension of requirement of
notice under Section 50 of the Act in case of bag, container etc. and only confined in case of
personal search of the accused. Such approach of the Court is praise worthy in the given
circumstances of the country as the drug business is on increasing trend due to a big profit
and if the courts deal with the matter keeping in view exigency of the time, naturally it would
44 State of Punjab v. Balbir Singh AIR 1994 Supreme Court 1872
45 Sajjan Abraham versus State of Kerala AIR 2001 Supreme Court 3190
46 State of Punjab versus Baldev Singh AIR 1999 Supreme Court 2378.
47 State of Himachal Pradesh versus Pawan Kumar AIR 2005 Supreme Court 2265.
P a g e | 41
facilitate decrease in this crime of drug abuse and therefore, the acquittal of the accused in
drug cases should be avoided on the basis of mere technicalities of law.
The investigating agencies are bound to follow the procedure of search and seizure as no
female shall be searched by anyone except a female. When female accused was searched by
male person, the search become illegal and accused was acquitted on this ground.48
Whenever incriminating articles are seized, the prosecution is required to send the sample of
contraband to Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL). Therefore, the seized article should be
sealed immediately and same should be deposited in Malkhana of concerned Police Station
and same be kept intact till deposited for analysis to FSL. The impression of seal used on
sealed articles is to be put on CFSL form in order to rule out the possibility of tampering of
seal on a sealed packet after seizure till the receipt of the same in laboratory. If any violation
is proved on record, which has caused prejudice to the accused, the accused is entitled for
acquittal as held by the Courts in India. No doubt, provisions of Section 55 of the NDPS Act
are only directory and not mandatory49. In a case, there was no evidence to show that
recovered article was properly sealed and kept in proper custody and there was unexplained
delay of three months in sending the articles to the court, the conviction under Section 21 of
the Act was held unsustainable. Therefore, it is concluded that the contraband articles
recovered must be properly sealed and preserved. The requirement of independent witnesses
not necessary in each and every case as it depends upon facts and circumstances of an
individual case. No doubt, while making a search and seizure, independent witness should be
joined but in lacking thereof, it is the bounden duty of the Court to scrutinize the evidence of
police officials with due care and caution. In Ram Singh versus State of Haryana, 50 there was
recovery of contraband and the public witness was joined in the investigation but he did not
support the prosecution story. In this case both the official witnesses were consistent in their
statements regarding factum of recovery, place of recovery, time of recovery and the manner
in which search was conducted and how the sample was taken and preserved and the
conviction of the accused was upheld. Therefore, if the evidence of police official witnesses
is trustworthy and reliable, conviction of accused persons can be warranted even in lacking of
independent corroboration. Now a days, the Courts are taking a proactive view as they are not
pressing public witnesses at every occasion but the evidence of police official witnesses is
required to be appreciated in the given facts and circumstances of an individual case.
48 State of Punjab v. Surinder Rani Chindi 2001 (4) RCR(Criminal) 776 (SC)
49 Valsala v. State of Kerala 1994 Cri.L.J.1 (SC)
50 Ram Singh v State of Haryana 2000 (1) RCR (Criminal) 541 (P&H).
P a g e | 42
The cases of juveniles conflict with law under the provisions of NDPS Act, 1985 are to be
dealt keeping in view the objectives of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children),
Act 2000 and as amended up to date. The Courts are governed by the provision of this Act
2000 pertaining to offences committed by the juvenile‟s conflict with law. When a juvenile
offender under the NDPS Act is produced before the Special Court, it is incumbent upon the
court to consider prayer for bail of the juvenile offender. While dealing with an application
for grant of bail, Court of Sessions or High Court as a Juvenile Court are empowered to
release the accused on bail in exercise of powers under Section 12 of the Juvenile Act, 2000.
The Court has to record a definite finding that the petitioner is a child, as such he is to be
released on bail under Section 12 of the Juvenile Act as there is nothing on record to believe
that the release of the juvenile is likely to bring him into association with any known criminal
or expose him to moral dangers or that his release shall defeat the ends of justice. The Courts
at some occasions have taken the view that provisions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act dealing
with the bail has over riding effect over the other laws and this approach of the courts is not
finding match with the objectives of the Juvenile Act, 2000 as in case of bail of juvenile
offender, in every case his matter should be considered under Section 12 of the Juvenile Act
as same was passed after NDPS Act, which is a Special Act. As regards the other accused is
concerned, conditions imposed for grant of bail under Section 37 of the NDPS Act are totally
justified. The NDPS Act is a Special Act dealing with special class of crime which is an
international menace; therefore, the legislature in its wisdom has enacted certain special
provisions affecting the powers of Trial Court in the matter of granting the bail. The Court
can allow bail only if it has reasonable feeling that the accused may not have committed the
offence and further, if the accused is allowed bail, he will not commit any offence as this
view has been supported by the Punjab & Haryana High Court in Gopi Ram versus State of
Haryana.51 Under Section 437 Cr.P.C., the burden is on the prosecution to show the existence
of reasonable grounds for believing that the accused is guilty while under Section 37 of the
Act, the burden is on the accused to show the existence of reasonable grounds for the belief
that he is not guilty of the offence. Since the offence under NDPS Act is so serious and
stringent provision has been made for release of such an accused under Section 37 of the Act.
It is concluded that for an offence under NDPS Act, his request for bail would be considered
when public prosecutor has an opportunity to oppose such bail and the court is satisfied with
the material collected that there are reasonable grounds to believe that against whom the
accusation is made is not guilty of such an offence and thirdly, in case of release, he is not
51 Gopi Ram v. State of Haryana. 1994 (2) Crimes 1075 (P&H).
P a g e | 43
likely to commit such offence. Therefore, Section 37 of the NDPS Act pertaining to bail is a
very strict provision and even discretionary power conferred under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is
subject to limitation under Section 37 of the NDPS Act. The position is reverse as regards
bail under NDPS Act as refusal of bail is rule and granting of bail is an exception. The NDPS
Act is silent regarding extension of benefit of anticipatory bail to the accused and therefore,
the Special Court can entertain applications for pre arrest bail and dispose of the same under
Section 438 Cr.P.C.
In India, forfeiture of property is not a new tool invented for the purpose of curbing the illegal
and nefarious activities of criminals indulging in heinous crime which have devastating effect
on peace, tranquility, economy of the nation and health of the citizens. Section 126 of the
Indian Penal Code took care to prescribe the punishment of forfeiture of property of the
offenders in certain cases such as committing depredations on territories of power at peace
with the Government of India. The Indian Parliament has introduced the system of forfeiture
of property by incorporating a new chapter 5-A titled “Forfeiture of property derived from or
used in illicit traffic” under the NDPS Act, 1985 by NDPS (Amendment) Act, 1988. The
response by Indian Parliament to the wealth and assets granted by illicit drug trade, though
delayed but there is no doubt that the time for implementation of forfeiture provision was the
most appropriate. The NDPS (Amendment) Act, 1988 which comprises 26 Sections (Section
68-A to 68-Z) provides strong teeth for the forfeiture of property acquired from or used in
illicit traffic of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances. Keeping in view the nature and
gravity of the problem, there is a need for highly specialized training of the selected officers
of the enforcement agencies and they should exclusively be assigned the job of tracing,
identification, freezing and forfeiture of the illegally acquired property. Financial
investigations leading to asset forfeiture has of late been accorded a lot of importance
internationally. The Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) has also focused its attention on its area
of drug law enforcement during the last few years. Still they have not been able to take full
advantage of the provisions relating to forfeiture as contained in the NDPS Act, 1985.
If the overall view is appreciated in totality, there is maximum acquittal in drug cases due to
main loopholes/ technical flaws like, (i) lack of cooperation from public or independent
witness; (ii) casual method of investigating the cases, allowing lacunae in the investigation;
(iii) liberal construction of statutes in favour of the accused and (iv) unusual delay and low
percentage of conviction but now the trend is slowly changing as various judgments have
been passed by the Supreme Court and various High Courts. For example, in past the accused
P a g e | 44
were acquitted due to non-joining of independent witnesses but now even if the independent
witness has not joined, the evidence of official witnesses is given weightage and conviction
can be based solely on the evidence of official witnesses. Same thing has happened with the
other important Section of the NDPS Act like Sections 41, 42, 43, 50, 52, 55 and 57 as the
provisions of these sections are mandatory and concerned officials are bound to comply with
the same but their non-compliance per se would not prove fatal unless it has resulted in
miscarriage of the justice or caused prejudice to the accused on the facts of cases. It has come
to notice that the judiciary holds sympathetic view towards the accused that has been charged
under this act. But now some changes are coming and there is great need of such changes. If
the accused who commit crime under this Act acquitted in this way, then there is no need of
such law. No doubt, this Act has many stringent and deterrent provisions, the judiciary while
implementing this Act should give weightage to both sides and should find some innovative
ways to bring truth to the light and no criminal should go unpunished. It is now high time that
necessary changes in the Act should be brought in order to achieve desired results.
In view of conclusion of the research, the researcher submits few suggestions which can
contribute for effective control of drug menace in India.
SUGGESTIONS
(1) Despite wide ranging changes made twice in NDPS Act, it is still vague and deficient in
certain aspects. These defects in law have been compounded with each amendment.
Emphasize should also be given to draft the law in easy language not only to make it popular
among the masses but also with a view to eliminate the scope of different interpretations of
law by the public, investigating agencies and judiciary. Under Section 36 A (1) (b), the
Judicial Magistrates have been empowered to detain and remand an arrestee to custody for a
period not exceeding fifteen days in total. Unlike, Section 167
(2) of Cr.P.C., the NDPS Act has not specified the outer period of detention except for
selected offences of commercial quantity. There is virtually horizontal split in the higher
P a g e | 45
judiciary in this regard. Many High Courts have held that a Magistrate becomes functus
officio after 15 days and for further remands, the accused persons are to be produced before
Special Judge. However, the Punjab & Haryana High Court in case of Janta Singh versus
State of Punjab52 has held that till Special Courts are constituted, the Judicial Magistrates can
remand the accused persons beyond the period of 15 days. Similar view on this point has also
been taken in judgment Alimuddin versus State of Rajasthan.53 Still both these High Courts
remained short of declaring that even after Constitution of Special Courts, the Special Judge
should not be asked to perform the function of Magistracy which frustrates the objective of
speedy trial of cases. Even confusion went to such a limit that the Orissa High Court held in a
case Bimbadhar Behera versus State of Orissa14in the year 1993 that Magistrates can remand
the accused persons beyond 90 days, not to speak of 15 days. Therefore, specific and clear
amendment or modification in Section 36 A is required.
(2) As per Section 36 A (4) in respect of persons accused of an offence punishable under
Section 19 or Section 24 or Section 27 A or for offences involving commercial quantity, the
custody of the accused may be continued upto 180 days if investigation is not completed
instead of 90 days as prescribed under Section 167 (2) Cr.P.C. Even if it is not possible to
complete the investigation within the said period of 180 days, the Special Court may extend
the said period upto one year on the report of Public Prosecutor indicating the progress of the
investigation. This provision giving so much leverage to the investigating agency is totally
against the speedy trial of such cases as speedy trial of the accused is his Constitutional right.
In cases under NDPS Act, to provide such a long period for investigation, is not justified
because mere conscious possession of contraband itself is an offence under different
provisions of the Act. This provision is directly hit the constitutional right of the accused and
creates the obstacle in speedy trial of these cases which is the main objective of this Special
Act. Even there is no need to give such a long time for investigation and hence, Section 36 A
(4) It is required necessary amendment or modification for reducing the period of

investigation where the accused is in custody, not exceeding 90 days in any case.
(3) Prior to 1989 amendments, no pre-conditions were imposed for grant of bail under
Section 37 of the NDPS Act and the bail applications were governed as per provision of
52 Janta Singh v. State of Punjab 1996 Cri.L.J.1185 (P&H) (FB).

53 Alimuddin versus State of Rajasthan. 1991 (1) EFR 263 (Raj.)(FB).
P a g e | 46
Cr.P.C. In 1989, few conditions were imposed for grant of bail to those Narcotic offences
which invited imprisonment for five years. Now the pre-conditions have been restricted to the
offences involving commercial quantity or offences falling under Sections 19, 24, 27 A of the
Act only. Despite the same, still these Legislations remained hazy regarding the powers of
Judicial Magistrate to entertain the bail application. By virtue of amendment of Section 36A,
the Judicial Magistrates have been empowered to try the offences which are punishable for a
term of three years and less by adopting summary procedure under sub Section 5 of Section
36 A. The 2001 Amendment has given the power of trial but did not specifically has given
power to the Magistrates to accept the bail prayers. Under Section 36 A (1) (b) the
Magistrates are required to forward an arrestee to the Special Courts, if detention of such
person is found unnecessary. Therefore, this proviso acts as a taboo upon the power of
Magistrates to grant the bail to the accused persons even in petty offences and same is
required attention of the legislators to make necessary amendments or modifications in this
provision to give clarity on this issue.
(5) The NDPS Act is conspicuously silent regarding extension of the benefit of anticipatory
bail to the accused persons. The Special Courts can invoke Section 36-C of the NDPS Act
wherein such Courts have been permitted to work under the umbrella of Cr.P.C. In the
absence of any specific embargo in the Act, like certain restrictions and pre-conditions
imposed under Section 37 for granting regular bail, it can only be inferred that the Special
Courts, which are deemed to be Court of Sessions, can entertain applications for pre-arrest
bail and dispose of the same under Section 438 Cr.P.C. The position of High Courts in the
matter of anticipatory bail is more piquant. Somehow Special Courts have been declared to
be the Court of Sessions having limited powers to entertain bail applications which fall in the
category of Section 439 Cr.P.C. This is clearly a ridiculous position of law. To wipe out this
anomaly, the Courts have taken two decades when Hon‟bleGauhati High Court in Baljeet
Singh versus State of Assam54 held that it would be wholly incompatible with the idea that it
has been denuded of its powers under section 438 Cr.P.C. Their Lordships further held that in
conformity with the Legislative intent expressed in Section 36B (Power relating to appeals
and revisions) to construe that in scheme of the Act as envisaged under Chapter IV thereof,
the power of High Court to grant pre-arrest bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. was preserved. It is
high time that this deficiency in the law should be cured legislatively for effective
implementation of the provisions of Drug Laws in India.
54 Baljeet Singh v. State of Assam 2004 (1) Gau.L.R.94 (Gau.).

P a g e | 47
(6) Section 27 of the NDPS Act deals with illegal possession of narcotic drugs etc. for
personal consumption in small quantity. Prior to 2001 amendment, the punishment for this
offence was one year or fine if the drug was cocaine, morphine and diacetyl-morphine and six
months or fine for possessing other drugs in small quantity. Under the said pre-amended Act
the Govt. of India determined the “small quantity” vide Notification dated 14.11.1985. The
table of, small quantity has been revised.
Name of the Small quantity Small quantity Ratio of

drug (Pre 2001) (Post 2001) Increase
1. Heroin/Brown 250 mgs 5 gms 20 times

Sugar
2.Hashish or 5 gms 100 gms 20 times
Charas
3.Opium 5 gms 25 gms 5 times
4. Cocaine 125 mgs 2 gms 16 times
5. Ganja 500 gms 1000 gms 2 times
While the entire world is unsuccessfully trying to control the menace of drug-trafficking and
drug abuse, the Govt. of India has increased the quantity of drugs which falls in the category
of “small quantity” which is contrary to the objectives of the enactment of NDPS Act. The
reasons for this are best known to the government but it requires reconsideration and
revaluation at the level of competent authorities or Legislature to wipe out these anomalies in
order to combat the drug menace in India.
(7) It has been experienced that the big offenders are being acquitted by the courts on
technical grounds or due to defective investigation conducted by the police for ulterior
motives. The courts must also share the responsibility to the ideals as enshrined in NDPS Act
as an offence relating to Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances is more heinous than a
culpable homicide because the later affects only an individual while the former affects and
leaves its deleterious impact on the society, besides shattering the economy of the nation as
well. In these circumstances, the court should consider the following points while operating
sentencing system under the NDPS Act.
P a g e | 48
a. The Courts must not only keep in view the rights of the criminal but also the right of the
victim of the crime and the society at large while considering the imposition of appropriate
punishment.
b. It is the nature and gravity of the crime but not the criminal which are germane for
consideration of appropriate punishment on a criminal in a criminal trial.
c. Under sympathy to impose inadequate sentence would do more harm to the justice delivery
system, to undermine the public confidence in the efficacy of law and society could not long
endure under such serious threats. It is, therefore the duty of every court to award proper
sentence having regard to the nature of the offence and the manner in which it was
committed.
d. The object should be to protect the society and to deter the criminal in achieving the
avowed object of law by imposing appropriate sentence. It is expected that the courts would
operate the sentencing system so as to impose such sentence which reflects the conscience of
the society and the sentencing process has to be stern and proportionate to the proved guilt of
the culprit. Any liberal attitude by imposing meager sentence or taking too sympathetic view
merely on account of lapse of time or personal inconveniences in respect of such offences,
will be counterproductive in the long run and against societal interest which needs to be
cared/strengthened by string of deterrence inbuilt in the sentencing system.
(8) There should be close interaction between Law Enforcement Agencies and Non-
Governmental Organizations (NGOs) involved in the treatment, rehabilitation and Social
integration of drug addicts.
(9) Drug abuse is psycho-socio-medical problem which needs to be treated in the entirety of
the life situations in the addicts. For making drugs free society, the causative factors of drug
addiction should be dealt efficiently and effectively, only then this problem of drug abuse can
be coped with otherwise this monster will annihilate and gobble up the entire humanity one
day. Every members of the society has to contribute his might in this important crusade of
mankind against abuse of drugs. The parents, the teachers, the social workers, the lawyers,
the judges, the artists, the literary figure, the men of religion, the legislators, the government
officials, enforcement agencies, everybody should take as his bounden duty to do whatever he
can, to prevent drug abuse and drug trafficking.
P a g e | 49
(10) The involvement of professional groups like psychologist, councilors, educators etc.
must be increased who are directly or indirectly concerned with alcoholism and drug abuse.
Drug medicating and meditative camps provide a pragmatic, costs effective and innovative
strategy for the treatment of drug addicts.
(11) A general awareness program is to be launched to educate the people about the
provisions of law and adverse effects of the drugs.
(12) The employment opportunities to the youth should be created so that they could get
themselves involved, channelized their energy in proper directions. There is need to establish
anti-drug police force in each and every state on Chinese model to enhance effective
implementation of drug laws in India.
(13) It has been observed that only poor people who are using the drug for personal
consumption or poor persons engaged as carriers by the Mafia of drug are being prosecuted
by the law enforcing agencies. Efforts must be made by the state as well as Central Law
enforcing agencies to trace out the origin of the source and real beneficiary of drug abuse
money and to prosecute the real offenders of the crime in the effective manner.
(14) There is urgent need to prevent and control the supply of drugs to affluent nations as the
bulk of demand for drugs comes from these nations. The efforts should be made on
globalized pattern involving the developed nations as the drug peddling is based on
consumer-demand-supply theme. If there will be no demand, the drug supply will not be
lucrative business and ultimately, the drug addiction problem can be coped up with
effectively.
(15) A comprehensive training program is also required for public prosecutors, investigators
and the Judges of the Special Courts in respect of various guidelines issued by the Hon’ble
Supreme Court and various High Courts in order to enhance their skill capabilities and this
program should be conducted at regular intervals.
(16) Besides above, special courts have been set up for speedy trial of offences under NPDS
Act in view of Section-36A of the Act. Still there is delay in disposal of these cases and
hence, slow motion Criminal trial should be expedited. The Government should made 21
effective steps for establishment of more special courts under the Act and to appoint the
judges for these courts as required for early disposal of cases under NDPS Act. In addition to
P a g e | 50
special courts, there is need to have a drug counseling and rehabilitation centre at district
level for rehabilitating drug addicts and running the awareness programs.
CHAPTER 8: FIELD WORK
Researcher’s study was limited within the area of Patna. Researcher talked to various people,
which includes two students(seniors) of CNLU and few common men and came to a certain
conclusion
INTERVIWEW SCHEDULE-155
Interview with a law Student (1th year, Female)
Respondent Name: Bhargavi Mishra
55 Time- 4:20pm
P a g e | 51
Date:
Place: CHANKYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, Patna
1. Do you perceive drug abuse to be Abuse at all? If you do then provide substantive reason for
the same.
Yes I perceive Drug related misuse to be a Abuse because when the use of a substance starts
harming you physically or mentally then you have misused a drug to the point of abuse.
2. Do you think Drug abuse is rampant in India? If yes then what according to you is the reason
behind this?
Over-protective parents are one of the reason that students practice drugs in india. Parents
usually shy away from talking about these issues and neither the child feel comfortable
enough to talk about it Other reasons could be cheap , easy availability and lack of the
availability of other recreation.
3. Are you aware of the Narcotics Dugs and Psychotropic Substances Act and the various
nuances of the same? What do you think about the effectiveness of the Act in curbing wide
spread drug abuse?
No I am not aware of the act.
4. Which age group according to you is the most adversely affected by Substance abuse in
India? What are the end consequences of the same?
I think from 16-20. Consequence of this is that they develop addiction problem in the
crucial years of their life and their education is affected.
5. According to you, what might be the reason/s for substance abuse among the teenagers of our
country?
Rush , Excitement , The thrill of trying something new and peer pressure.
6. It is statistically proven that Drug abuse is more rampant in the Border states like Punjab and
the North-Eastern states- What do you think is the reason behind this kind of rampant drug
abuse?
This is because of the overflow of drugs from Afghanistan and Bangkok into India and easy
availability leads to over use.
7. What according to you is the most suitable solution to this problem of drug abuse? Keeping
in mind the presence of an already existing legislation what do you think needs to be added
or replaced to ameliorate the situation?
P a g e | 52
Building up proper rehab centre’s where a victim is treated humanly and family’s shouldn’t
ostracize their member who happens to addicted to drugs and give him/her the love and
affection h/she needs in such a tough time.
INTERVIWEW SCHEDULE-256
Interview with a law student (1st year, Female)
Respondent Name: Rittika Vijay Srivastava
Date:
Place: Chanakya National Law University, Patna
1. Do you perceive drug abuse to be Abuse at all? If you do then provide substantive reason for
the same?
Yes, in my opinion drug abuse is obviously an abuse affecting society at large. Drug abuse
is such an abuse affects the humans or particular group of society in a way wherein it
becomes difficult for people to get rid of those addictive habits.
2. Do you think Drug abuse is rampant in India? If yes then what according to you is the reason
behind this?
Yes, drug abuse is rampant in India. There may be several reasons for drug abuse prevalent
For example- In contemporary time, a higher degree of drug addiction is found among
teenagers due to various reasons like psychological aspects, peer pressure or mental tension,
etc.
3. Are you aware of the Narcotics Dugs and Psychotropic Substances Act and the various
nuances of the same? What do you think about the effectiveness of the Act in curbing wide
spread drug abuse?
Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act of 1985 was introduced basically to
restrict a person to produce, possess, sell or consume any narcotic drug or any other kind of
psychotropic substance in India. Primarily till 1985 the consumption of cannabis and its
derivatives were legally allowed and was not considered against any social norm. But after
the introduction of this very act, all such substances were legally ceased to be circulated in
the society.
56 Time- 3:30pm
P a g e | 53
4. Which age group according to you is the most adversely affected by Substance abuse in
India? What are the end consequences of the same?
According to me the most adversely affected group would be of teenagers who actually
belong to age group of 28-30 years. This leads to hazardous consequences on them as well
as their life. Drug abuse fundamentally affects the brain of a person. People who are under
the influence of drug abuse face, problems like anxiety, depression, schizophrenia or even
suicidal thoughts. In teens, it is commonly found that those teens who suffer from
depression are more likely to be abusive of drugs. Also drug abuse damages short term and
long term memory. On the whole drug abuse can result in serious mental disorder or
permanent, irreversible damage to brain or nervous system
5. According to you, what might be the reason/s for substance abuse among the teenagers of our
country?
Teenagers are more prone to such addictive substance lie drugs and alcohol reasons for this
may be umpteen. A major issue which a teenager goes through is peer pressure which is a
powerful force specially during adolescence which makes a person to commit such a thing
which he won’t do if not pressure is exerted also many teenagers for fun want to try this
where as other many seek this alternative to rise above the their boredom also teenager have
a tendency to imitate certain figure which may influence to do so those who suffer from
some mental or emotional pressure, generally seek this as an option to curb their situation.
And certainly, if a person is addicted to a drug he tends to take it in abundance.
6. It is statistically proven that Drug abuse is more rampant in the Border states like Punjab and
the North-Eastern states- What do you think is the reason behind this kind of rampant drug
abuse?
Yes, the problem of drug abuse is more rampant in northeastern states in India this may be
due to the fact that cultivation of such substance as well as the import and export of these
parts. Also the people from these areas are found more drug abusive than in any other part
of India.
7. What according to you is the most suitable solution to this problem of drug abuse? Keeping
in mind the presence of an already existing legislation what do you think needs to be added
or replaced to ameliorate the situation?
This act already provides a preventive measure against drug abuse. Apart from this more
awareness can be brought among people about the hazardous consequences of such
addictions. Also a drug addict can be referred to a councilor so that his mental thoughts can
be ad clear by the person. Also the circulation of such substances should be checked upon.
P a g e | 54
BIBLIOGRAPHY
WEBSITES
 https://blog.ipleaders.in/a-detailed-analysis-of-the-national-drugs-and-
psychotropic-substances-act/
 https://factly.in/understanding-ndps-act/
 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/259937757_Current_status_of_the_narco
tic_drugs_and_psychotropic_substances_NDPS_act
 http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/opinion/editorials/are-our-narcotics-laws-
effective/articleshow/1637838.cms
 https://thewire.in/19907/indias-anti-narcotics-law-is-in-urgent-need-of-rehab/
 https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/policy-ndps-act-time-greater-reform-mathew-john
 http://www.legallyindia.com/views/entry/high-time-the-drug-law-is-sent-to-rehab
REFERENCES
 DSM-IV & DSM-IV-TR:Substance Dependence
 Marihuana and medicine, p. 3
P a g e | 55
 P. Ram Manohar, "Smoking and Ayurvedic Medicine in India" in Smoke, pp. 68–
75
 Psychedelics encyclopedia By Peter G. Stafford, Jeremy Bigwood, Ronin

Publishing, 1992 ISBN 978-0-914171-51-5
 "Recreational use of marijuana: Always a way of life in our country - Times of

India".
 "The joint campaign: Should we not legalize recreational use of Cannabis? - Times
of India".
 "Recreational use of marijuana: Of highs and laws - Times of India".
 http://narcoticsindia.nic.in/NDPS%20Act,%201985.pdf This article

incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
 "Legal Marijuana in India? Punjab Lawmaker Dharamvir Gandhi Set to Move

Parliament". News18. 2 November 2016. Retrieved 26 March 2017.
 http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-11-10/india/35033489_1_bhang-
marijuana-for-medical-purposes-charas
 "Make cannabis consumption legal; ban is turning people alcoholic: BJD chief
whip Tathagata Satpathy". The Indian Express. 11 December 2015. Retrieved 10
December 2016.
 "Cannabis ban is elitist. It should go: Tathagata Satpathy". The Times of India.
Retrieved 10 December 2016.
 "BJD MP Tathagata Satpathy Tells How to Score Weed". The New Indian Express.
Retrieved 10 December 2016.
 "Bill for legalised supply of opium, marijuana cleared for Parliament". Hindustan
Times. 19 October 2016. Retrieved 10 December 2016.
 http://lawmin.nic.in/legislative/textofcentralacts/1989.pdf
 "Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 2001- Introduction".
 "THE NARCOTIC DRUGS AND PSYCHOTROPIC SUBSTANCES

(AMENDMENT) ACT, 2001 – Lawyers Law".
 Maya, C. "Passing of NDPS Act Amendment Bill will make morphine more
accessible".
 http://palliumindia.org/cms/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/FAQs-Amendment-of-
NDPS-2014.pdf
P a g e | 56
 "» Parliament passes the NDPS (Amendment) Bill, 2014: many gains; some
losses".
 "PRS - Bill Track - The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances

(Amendment) Bill, 2011".
 "4857GI.p65" (PDF). Retrieved 2016-12-11.
 http://www.mphc.in/jotri/trainings/NDPS%20SINGH%20SIR.docx
%20corrected.pdf
NEWSPAPER REFERRED
 Times of India
 The Hindu

Impact of NDPS Act on Drug Abuse in India

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Impact of NDPS Act on Drug Abuse in India

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

SOCIOLOGY II

NARCOTICS DRUGS PSYCHOTROPIC SUBSTANCES ACT,

CHANAKYA NATIONAL LAW

DR. SANGEET KUMAR

B.A. LLB, 2ND SEMESTER

METHODS OF DATA COLLECTION

TOOLS OF DATA COLLECTION

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

The aim of the researcher is to:

a) Understand the gravity of the problem of substance abuse in India.

The method of writing followed in the following project is primarily analytical.

Although drafted in consonance with International principles, it contradicts general principles

CHAPTER I: SUBSTANCE ABUSE

Public health definitions

Drug users injecting heroin, an opiate.

12 DSM-IV & DSM-IV-TR:Substance Dependence

multiple physicians to prescribe the same medication, without knowledge of other

Increasingly, law enforcement is holding physicians responsible for prescribing controlled

15 E. Fehrman, A. K. Muhammad, E. M. Mirkes, V. Egan, A. N. Gorban,The Five Factor Model of personality

CHAPTER II: THE HISTORY OF INDIAN

The Opium Act, 1857

The Opium Act, 1878

(4) To correct a clerical error in section 22 of the same Act

21 B.R.Beotra, “Law of Drugs”, (Butterworth‟s, 2000), p.42.

(1) The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

CHAPTER III: THE NARCOTIC DRUGS AND

28 Section 4 of the NDPS Act, 1985.

30 Section 6 of the NDPS Act, 1985.

33 Section 8 of the NDPS Act, 1985.

38 Section 13 of the NDPS Act, 1985.

Sr.No. Drug/Psychotropic Small Quantity Commercial

CHAPTER IV: EFFECTIVENESS OF THE ACT

Experts, I am confident, would consider whether all deserve to be similarly treated or

The topics for discussion, on this Workshop-cum-Training Programme provide provocative

“The investigation, prosecution and suppression of crime for

(i) Recovery of contraband, search and seizure

(ii) Mandatory provisions: Non-compliance thereof and effects

(iii) Samples and FSL reports

(iv) Independent witness

(v) Juvenile Offenders under NDPS Act

requirement as contemplated under Sections 41 and 42 is applicable where such empowered

(4) It is required necessary amendment or modification for reducing the period of

52 Janta Singh v. State of Punjab 1996 Cri.L.J.1185 (P&H) (FB).

54 Baljeet Singh v. State of Assam 2004 (1) Gau.L.R.94 (Gau.).

Name of the Small quantity Small quantity Ratio of

1. Heroin/Brown 250 mgs 5 gms 20 times

CHAPTER 8: FIELD WORK

Interview with a law Student (1th year, Female)

Respondent Name: Bhargavi Mishra

Place: CHANKYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, Patna

No I am not aware of the act.

Interview with a law student (1st year, Female)

Respondent Name: Rittika Vijay Srivastava

Place: Chanakya National Law University, Patna

 Psychedelics encyclopedia By Peter G. Stafford, Jeremy Bigwood, Ronin

 "Recreational use of marijuana: Always a way of life in our country - Times of

 "Recreational use of marijuana: Of highs and laws - Times of India".

 http://narcoticsindia.nic.in/NDPS%20Act,%201985.pdf This article

 "Legal Marijuana in India? Punjab Lawmaker Dharamvir Gandhi Set to Move

 "Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 2001- Introduction".

 "THE NARCOTIC DRUGS AND PSYCHOTROPIC SUBSTANCES

 "PRS - Bill Track - The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances

 "4857GI.p65" (PDF). Retrieved 2016-12-11.