SUKHDEV SINGH versus STATE OF HARYANA

Citation: [2012] 11 S.C.R. 964 · Decided: 13-12-2012 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: SWATANTER KUMAR · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
[2012] 11 S.C.R. 964 
SUKHDEV SINGH 
v. 
STATE OF HARYANA 
(Criminal Appeal No. 2118 of 2008) 
DECEMBER 13, 2012 
[SWATANTER KUMAR AND MADAN B. LOKUR, JJ.] 
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 
-
s.42(2) [as pre-amended] and s.15 -
Reporting of 
C information reduced to writing to higher officer - Non-
compliance - Effect - Held: On facts, the information was 
received by PW1 Investigating Officer on 4th February, 1994, 
thus, s.42(2) as amended w.e.f. 2nd October,2001 vide 
Amending Act No.9 of 2001 would not apply, and instead the 
D pre-amended s.42(2) would govern the case - PW1, while on 
patrol duty, had received secret information against the 
accused - However, as per the statement of PW1, no effort 
was made by him to reduce the information into writing and 
inform his higher authorities instantaneously or even after a 
E reasonable delay - PW1 had more than sufficient time at his 
disposal to comply with the provisions of s.42 - He had 
received the secret information at 11.30 a.m., but he reached 
the house of the accused at 2 p.m. even when the distance 
was only 6 kilometers away and he was in a jeep - Not an 
F iota of evidence, either in the statement of PW1 or in any other 
documentary form, to show what PW1 was doing for these two 
hours and what prevented him from complying with the 
provisions of s. 42 -
There was patent illegality in the 
prosecution case, which was incurable - Relief granted to the 
G accused - Conviction uls. 15 as recorded by Courts below set 
aside - Accused acquitted. 
H 
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 
- s.42(2) - Reporting of information reduced to writing to 
964 
SUKHDEV SINGH v. STATE OF HARYANA 
965 
higher officer - Amendment of sub-section (2) of s.42 w.e.f. 
A 
2nd October, 2001 vide Amending Act 9 of 2001 - Effect -
Held: After amendment of this sub-section, the words 
'forthwith' stood amended by the words 'within 72 hours' -
Resultantly, absolute certainty brought in by binding the 
officer concerned to send the intimation to the superior officer B 
within 72 hours from the time ·or receipt of information - The 
amendment is suggestive of the legislative intent that 
information must reach the superior officer not only 
expeditiously or forthwith but definitely within the time 
contemplated under the amended sub-section (2) of s.42 - c 
This provides greater certainty to the time in which the action 
should be taken as well as renders the safeguards provided 
to an accused more meaningful. 
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 
- s.42(2) - Amendment of, vide Amending Act No. 9 of 2001 
D 
- Applicability of the Amending Act - Held: Cannot be with 
retrospective effect - The law as it existed at the time of 
commission of the offence would be the law which will govern 
the rights and obligations of the parties under the NDPS Act 
- Settled principle of interpretation of criminal jurisprudence E 
that the provisions have to be strictly construed and cannot 
be given a retrospective effect unless legislative intent and 
expression is clear beyond ambiguity. 
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 
F 
- s.42 - Compliance with - Is mandatory and not optional -
Incumbent duty of every investigating officer to comply with 
the provisions of s.42 in true substance and spirit in 
consonance with the law stated by this Court in the case of 
Kamai/ Singh. 
PW1(ASI), while on patrol duty, received secret 
information against the accused that he was in the habit 
of selling chura post (poppy husk) in his house and if a 
raid is conducted upon the house of the accused, he can 
G 
be caught red-handed with the contraband. Search was 
H 
966 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2012] 11 S.C.R. 
A conducted and five bags were found lying concealed 
under a heap of chaff in the courtyard of the house of the 
accused. Notice was served upon the accused under 
Section 50 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic 
Substances Act, 1985 ('NDPS Act') giving him an offer to 
B be searched before a Gazetted Officer or a Magistrate. 
The accused expressed his desire to be searched before 
a Gazetted Officer of the police. PW1 thereupon sent an 
application to the Deputy Superintendent of Police (DSP) 
who reached the spot and upon his instruction the search 
C of the bags was conducted. From each gunny bag, 100 
grams of chura post was separated as sample. The 
samples and the gunny bags were sealed and taken into 
possession. Ther

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.