SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Gau) 461

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Yarenjungla Longkumer, J.
Kiri Ori Son of Late Markir Ori - Appellant 
Vs.
The State of AP and Anr. - Respondent 
Crl.Rev.P./5/2024
Decided On : 11-04-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. Dugmar Kamduk
For the Respondent: Mr. T. Ete (Additional P.P.)

Section 64A of the NDPS Act provides immunity from prosecution for drug addicts who voluntarily seek treatment, emphasizing rehabilitation over punishment.

Headnote:(A) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Sections 397 and 482 - Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Section 20(b)(ii)(A) and Section 64A - Quashing of conviction for drug consumption - Petitioner, a drug addict, arrested for possession of small quantity of Ganja, successfully completed rehabilitation - Court emphasized the importance of treatment over punishment and granted immunity under Section 64A - Conviction and fine quashed. (Paras 2, 22)

(B) Immunity for Drug Addicts - Section 64A of the NDPS Act provides immunity from prosecution for drug addicts who voluntarily seek treatment - Courts should prioritize rehabilitation over punitive measures for drug users. (Paras 17, 21)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner was arrested for consuming Ganja and found in possession of a small quantity during a police raid. He voluntarily sought rehabilitation and completed a four-month treatment program. (Paras 3, 6)

Findings of Court:
The court found that the petitioner had undergone proper treatment and was entitled to immunity under Section 64A of the NDPS Act, emphasizing rehabilitation over punishment. (Paras 22)

Issues: The main issues were whether the petitioner was entitled to immunity under Section 64A of the NDPS Act and the appropriateness of the conviction. (Paras 9, 22)

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that Section 64A of the NDPS Act allows for immunity from prosecution for drug addicts who voluntarily seek treatment, reinforcing the principle that rehabilitation should be prioritized. (Paras 17, 21)

Result: The order dated 23.02.2024, conviction under Section 20(b)(ii)(A) NDPS Act, and fine of Rs. 5000/- are quashed and set aside.

JUDGMENT & ORDER :

YARENJUNGLA LONGKUMER, J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Dugmar Kamduk and Mr. T. Ete, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent.

2. The present Crl.Rev.P/5/2024 is filed under Section 397 r/w Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, praying for setting aside and quashing of the order dated 23.02.2024 passed by the learned District & Session Judge, Pasighat, East Siang District, Arunachal Pradesh in PSG SC (NDPS) Case No. 48/23 Corresponding to Yingkiong Police Station Case No. 18/2022 under Section 20(b) (ii) A of the NDPS Act.

3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Dugmar Kamduk appearing for the petitioner/accused states that accused was arrested on 03.06.2022, during a raid to arrest another person namely, Shri. Katem Libang. While in search of the said Shri. Katem Libang at forest colony, Yingkoing, the police team had mistakenly entered into the residence of the petitioner/accused and had found the petitioner consuming Ganja and recovered small quantity of Ganja from his room. Accordingly, a written FIR dated 03.06.2022 was lodged against the petitioner alleging that he was found consuming Ganja in his residence and that small quantity of Ganja was recovered from his possession. And on the basis of the said FIR, a case was registered against him being Yingkiong PS Case No. 18/2022 under Section 20(b)(ii)(A) of the NDPS Act.

4. It is stated by the learned counsel that the petitioner was in custody for 28 days and thereafter, he himself voluntarily sought to undergo medical treatment for De-addiction at a Rehabilitation Centre and as such he was granted bail by the Special Judge (NDPS), Pasighat, East Siang District, in order to enable him to undergo medical treatment for De-addiction from a Rehabilitation Centre.

5. The learned Special Judge (NDPS), Pasighat, East Siang District, by order dated 30.06.2022 allowed the petitioner to go on interim bail on the condition that he shall be admitted in a Rehabilitation Centre within a period of one week and further directed to submit the admission and status report from the Rehabilitation Centre.

6. It is also stated that after being released on interim bail the petitioner was immediately admitted at Shalom Rapha Foundation, Drug Addiction and Rehabilitation Centre, Roing, Lower Dibang Valley District and the admission receipt of the same was placed before the Special Judge (NDPS), Pasighat. Accordingly, on 28.07.2022 the Special Judge (NDPS), Pasighat, by order dated 30.06.2022, made the interim bail absolute. It is further submitted that the petitioner successfully completed four months course of his treatment at the Rehabilitation Centre and he was discharged from the Rehabilitation Centre on 03.11.2023. Thereafter, the petitioner got himself admitted at Himalayan University, Itanagar, and at present, he is pursuing M.A. in Political Science.

7. At this juncture, the case against the petitioner was investigated and a charge-sheet bearing No. 2/2023 under Section 20(b)(ii)(A) NDPS Act was filed on 26.04.2023 in connection with Yingkiong PS Case No. 18/2022. Thereafter, the Special Judge NDPS, Pasighat, issued summon to the petitioner for appearance on 20.10.2023.

8. The petitioner therefore filed an I.A. Crl. No. 33/2023 before the Special Judge NDPS, Pasighat, for grant of immunity from prosecution under provision of Section 64 A of the NDPS Act. And the matter was taken up on 23.02.2024 whereby, the Special Judge NDPS, Pasighat, rejected the said I.A.33/2023, and on the same day charge was framed against the petitioner and he was convicted and sentenced with fine of Rs. 5000/- to be deposited within one month. And with a further direction that upon delay of payment he shall be imprisoned for another 3 months.

9. Learned counsel for the petitioner/accused therefore submits that the learned Special Judge should have considered his prayer for immunity under Section 64 A of the NDPS Act, before consideration of charge. Learned

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top