LexDIRECTORATE OF REVENUE INTELLIGENCE versus RAJ KUMAR ARORA & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2025] 4 S.C.R. 835 : 2025 INSC 498 Directorate of Revenue Intelligence v. Raj Kumar Arora & Ors. (Criminal Appeal No. 1319 of 2013) 17 April 2025 [J.B. Pardiwala* and Manoj Misra, JJ.] Issue for Consideration Issue arose whether an offence u/s.8(c) of the NDPS Act could be said to have been made out when an accused “deals with” psychotropic substances mentioned in the Schedule to the NDPS Act but not figuring in Schedule I of the Rules thereunder; whether the decision in Sanjeev V. Deshpande’s case must operate with prospective effect; and that once, charge has been framed by a competent court u/s.228 CrPC, can an accused thereafter seek for discharge/deletion of a particular offence from the charge u/s.216 CrPC. Headnotes† Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 – s.8 – Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Rules, 1985 – rr.53, 64, Chapter VIIA – Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 – Dealing in psychotropic substances-“Buprenorphine Hydrochloride” that appear in the Schedule to the NDPS Act but do not figure in Schedule I to the NDPS Rules, if constitutes an offence u/s.8(c): Held: It cannot be said that the dealing in of “Buprenorphine Hydrochloride” would not amount to an offence u/s.8 owing to the fact that the said psychotropic substance only finds mention under the Schedule to the NDPS Act and is not listed under Schedule I of the NDPS Rules – There exists nothing to indicate that rr.53 and 64 of the NDPS Rules respectively, are the governing rules in their respective Chapters, more so, when the language of the other rules in Chapters VI and VII respectively, are clear about their application to the substances mentioned under the Schedule to the Act as well – All the psychotropic substances mentioned under the Schedule to the Act have potential grave and harmful consequences to the individual and the society at large, when * Author 836 [2025] 4 S.C.R. Supreme Court Reports abused – Some psychotropic substances mentioned under the Schedule to the NDPS Act are also mentioned under the D&C Act and the rules framed thereunder – This is only because those substances while capable of being abused for their inherent properties could also be used in the field of medicine – However, the mere mention of certain psychotropic substances under the D&C regime would not take them away from the purview of the NDPS Act, if they are also mentioned under the Schedule to the NDPS Act – Courts below erred in holding that the offence under the provisions of the NDPS Act is not made out – Trial courts could also not have discharged/deleted the charge under the NDPS Act framed against the accused persons while disposing of an application u/s.216 – This is something not permissible within the criminal procedure and the High Court unfortunately failed to take notice of this aspect – Accused persons were not acquitted but discharged – There arises no occasion to hold them technically guilty of the offences under the provisions of the NDPS Act that they were charged with – Accused to be tried by the concerned Special Judge, NDPS, in accordance with law – Impugned orders passed by the High Court set aside. [Paras 156, 157, 161-163] Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 – Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Rules, 1985 – Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1940 – NDPS Act and Rules, if applicable in addition to the 1940 Act: Held: s.80 states that the provisions of NDPS Act or Rules made thereunder shall be in addition to, and not in derogation of D&C Act and Rules made thereunder – Thus, when an offence under D&C Act is made out or can potentially be made out, accused can also be charged or prosecuted for an offence under NDPS Act or vice-versa – Due to operation of r.65, a violation of the condition of licence under the D&C Act read with its Rules would ipso facto tantamount to a violation of NDPS Act read with its Rules – To say that no offence would be made out in a case where an accused deals with a substance mentioned only under Schedule to the Act, would have the consequence of rendering entire Schedule to the Act useless, unnecessary and nugatory – NDPS Rules do not absolutely prohibit dealing in of substances mentioned under Schedule I of Rules – Substances in Schedule I of Rules can also be dealt with but only for the limited purposes mentioned under Chapter VIIA – All other substances mentioned only under Schedule to the Act can [2025] 4
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.