THANA SINGH versus CENTRAL BUREAU OF NARCOTICS

Citation: [2013] 2 S.C.R. 899 · Decided: 23-01-2013 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: D.K. JAIN, J.S. KHEHAR · Disposal: Disposed off
Cited by 2 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

(2013) 2 S.C.R. 899 
THANA SINGH 
v. 
CENTRAL BUREAU OF NARCOTICS 
(Criminal Appeal No. 1640 of 2010) 
JANUARY 23, 2013 
[D.K. JAIN AND JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR, JJ.] 
A 
B 
Constitution of India, 1950 - Articles 32, 21 and 141 -
Appeal of accused for an offence under Narcotic Drugs and 
Psychotropic Substances Act (NDPS Act) - Seeking bail -
C 
Accused denied bail and was languishing in jail for 12 years 
awaiting commencement of trial - Supreme Court granted bail 
- Also issued notice to all the Sates taking cognizance of 
status quo and gain a first-hand account about the state of 
trials in cases under NDPS Act pending in all the States - o 
Directions and guidelines issued - The practice of granting 
adjournments lavishly to be abolished - Fourth proviso to s. 
309 (2) Cr.P.C. (inserted bys. 21(b) of Act 5 of 2009), which 
awaits notification, deserves immediate notification - Till the 
statutory provisions are in place, the Court directed that no 
E 
NDPS court to grant adjournment at the request of the party 
except where circumstances beyond control of the party and 
where hearing date fixed as per convenience of the counsel, 
no adjournment to be granted without exception - A provision 
analogous to s. 22(c) of Prevention of Corruption Act should F 
be legislated for trials under NDPS Act - Courts directed to 
adopt method of 'sessions trial' anq conduct examination and 
cross-examination of a witness on consecutive dates over a 
block period of three to four days - The courts to take evidence 
of official witnesses in the form of affidavit as per s. 293 Cr. P. C G 
- States are directed to establish Special Courts to deal 
exclusively with offences under NDPS Act - The number of 
these Courts must be proportionate to and sufficient for 
handling the volume of pending cases - Till the establishment 
899 
H 
900 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2013) 2 S.C.R. 
A of exclusive .NDPS Court, the NDPS cases would be 
prioritized over all other matters - More number of Central 
Forensic Science Laboratories (CFSL) must be established, 
so as to cater to the needs from different parts of the country-
Each State directed to establish State level and regional level 
8 
forensic science laboratories J Directorate of Forensic Science 
Services directed to take special steps to ensure 
standardization of equipments and to address 
the problem 
of shortage of staff in the existing laboratories - Request as 
to re-testing/re-sampling not to be entertained under NDPS 
C Act, as a matter of course - Nodal Officers (equivalent or 
superior to the rank of Superintendent of Police) to be 
appointed in all the departments dealing with NDPS cases 
for monitoring the progress of investigation and trial - There 
must be one 'Pairvi Offier' or other such officers for e~ch court 
0 
who shall report the days's proceedings to the Nodal Officer -
Appointment of Special Public Prosecutors for the Central 
Bureau of Narcotics should be in line with the procedure 
followed as mandated u/s. 24 Cr.P.C - For simplification of 
procedure u/s. 207 Cr.P. C, directed that filing of charge-sheet 
and supply of other documents to be in electronic form -
E Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 -
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - s. 309(2) Proviso 4 (as 
inserted bys. 21(b) of Act 5 of2009); ss. 293, 207 and 24 -
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 - s. 22(c). 
F 
Supreme Court Legal Aid Committee Representing 
Undertria/Prisoners vs. Union of India and Ors. (1994) 6 SCC 
731: 1994 (4) Suppl. SCR 386; Achint Navinbhai Patel vs. 
State of Gujarat and Anr. (2002) 10 SCC 529; Hussainara 
Khatoon and Ors. vs. Home Secretary, State of Bihar (1980) 
G 1 sec 81: 1979 (3) SCR 169 - relied on. 
H 
State of Kera/a vs. Deepak. P. Shah 2001 CriLJ 2690; 
Nihal Khan vs. The State (Govt. of NCT Delhi) 2007 CriLJ 
207 4 • referred to. 
THANA SINGH v. CENTRAL BUREAU OF 
901 
NARCOTICS 
Antonio Richard Rochin vs. People of the State of 
California 96 L. Ed. 183 (1951) - referred to. 
Case Law Reference: 
1994 (4) Suppl. SCR 386 
Relied on 
Para 1 
(2002) 1 o sec 529 
Relied on 
Para 1 
96 L. Ed. 183 (1951) 
Referred to 
Para 2 
1979 (3) SCR 169 
Relied on 
Para 8 
2001 CriLJ 2690 
Referred to 
Para 23 
2007 CrlLJ 207 4 
Referred to 
Para 23 
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal 
No. 1640 of 2010. 
From the Judgment & Order dated 07.10.2009 of the High 
Court of Madhya Pradesh Bench at Indore in Misc. Criminal 
Case No. 6036 of 2009. 
A 
B 
c 
D 
P.P. M
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.