Can a CJM Discharge an Accused Under Section 250 BNSS for NDPS Sections 22(a) or 27?

In the realm of narcotics law in India, questions about judicial powers often arise, especially for minor offences involving small quantities of drugs. One pressing issue is whether the Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM) possesses the authority to discharge an accused under Section 250 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023—the successor to Section 250 CrPC—for offences under Section 22(a) (possession of small quantity psychotropic substances) or Section 27 (consumption of narcotic drugs or psychotropic substances) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act).

This blog post delves into this legal query: Cite case laws to show that CJM has power to discharge an accused under 250 BNSS for offence under section 22(a)/27 of the NDPS Act. While direct precedents may be elusive, judicial interpretations of magistrate jurisdiction, bailability, and the absence of NDPS overrides provide valuable insights. Note: This is general information based on available legal documents and not specific legal advice. Consult a qualified lawyer for your case.

Understanding the Offences: Sections 22(a) and 27 NDPS

Sections 22(a) and 27 NDPS deal with relatively minor offences compared to commercial quantity cases:- Section 22(a): Possession, purchase, or use of small quantity psychotropic substances, punishable up to 1 year imprisonment, fine, or both. 2025 0 Supreme(Pat) 168- Section 27: Consumption of narcotic drugs or psychotropic substances, similarly punishable with less than 3 years imprisonment or fine. 2025 0 Supreme(Pat) 168

These are classified as bailable and triable by any Magistrate under Part II of the First Schedule to CrPC (now BNSS equivalent). As noted, Part II of First Schedule CrPC provides that if the offence is punishable with imprisonment for less than three years or fine only it shall be bailable and can be tried by any Magistrate. 2025 0 Supreme(Pat) 168

High Courts have consistently upheld this:- Bombay High Court in Stefan Mueller vs. State of Maharashtra (2010 SCC OnLine Bom 1974): Offences under similar provisions like Section 20(b)(ii)(A) and 27 are bailable. 2025 0 Supreme(Pat) 168- Kerala High Court in Muhammed Navas Mahamood vs. Station House Officer (2020 SCC OnLine Ker 564): Section 22(a) is bailable due to punishment up to 1 year. 2025 0 Supreme(Pat) 168

This magistrate-triable status implies standard procedural powers, including potential discharge, unless NDPS explicitly bars them.

Section 250 BNSS: Power to Discharge and Compensation

Section 250 BNSS empowers Magistrates to discharge an accused and award compensation if the accusation is frivolous or vexatious, mirroring old CrPC Section 250. For NDPS minor offences, no documents reveal an explicit bar. NDPS Section 37 overrides CrPC on cognizability and bail for serious offences but spares small quantity cases like 22(a)/27. 2025 0 Supreme(Pat) 168

Allahabad High Court in Abdul Aziz vs. State of U.P. affirmed: in the matter of bail the provisions of Cr.P.C. will apply in the present case. 2025 0 Supreme(Pat) 168 By extension, trial procedures—including discharge—likely follow suit, as NDPS lacks overrides for Section 250.

Absence of Direct Case Laws but Supportive Implications

Available documents do not cite cases explicitly linking CJM discharge under Section 250 BNSS/CrPC 250 to NDPS 22(a)/27. However, broader NDPS jurisprudence supports magistrate powers:

• In NDPS Special Case No.711 of 2021, the applicant was discharged under Section 8(c) r/w 22(b), 27A and 29 NDPS due to unsubstantiated charges and CrPC joinder violations (Sections 218/219). The court quashed orders via revision under CrPC Sections 397/401, emphasizing procedural compliance. 2025 Supreme(Online)(Bom) 4212

This discharge in an NDPS context (though not exactly 22(a)/27 or by CJM under 250) shows courts exercising discharge powers without NDPS hindrance.

• Kerala High Court clarified that Section 52A NDPS does not deprive jurisdictional Magistrates of interim custody powers under BNSS Section 497 (old CrPC 457) for seized vehicles in Section 22(a) cases. Section 52A of the NDPS Act does not deprive the jurisdictional courts of its power to grant interim custody of the vehicle under Section 497 of the BNSS. 2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 49694

This reinforces that NDPS special procedures do not oust general Magistrate powers.

Other NDPS documents focus on bail (e.g., Section 37 bar for commercial quantities irrelevant here

Sudheer VS State of Kerala - Crimes (2012)

NDPS Section 36A and Magistrate Role

NDPS Section 36A routes serious cases to Special Courts, but minor ones remain with Magistrates. Documents note: While trying an offence under the NDPS Act, the Special Court may also try an offence other than an offence under the NDPS Act... but affirm CrPC applicability otherwise. 2021 2 Supreme 1

Cognizability under NDPS Section 37(1)(a) does not strip trial powers: all the offences under the NDPS Act are cognizable notwithstanding the provisions of Cr.P.C. Yet, for small quantities, CrPC/BNSS governs. 2025 0 Supreme(Pat) 168

Practical Considerations and Limitations

• No NDPS Override on Discharge: Unlike bail restrictions for commercial quantities, small offence documents show no such bar. 2025 0 Supreme(Pat) 168
• CJM as Magistrate: CJM, being a Magistrate, inherits these powers for triable cases.
• BNSS Transition: Analysis relies on CrPC precedents, as BNSS is recent with no contrary documents.
• Challenges: Opponents may cite Special Judge involvement in some NDPS cases 2018 0 Supreme(P&H) 3170, but small quantity rulings prioritize Magistrates. 2025 0 Supreme(Pat) 168

In bail contexts for non-commercial NDPS, CrPC applies fully. 2012 0 Supreme(Ker) 118

Key Takeaways and Recommendations

While direct case laws affirming CJM's Section 250 BNSS power for NDPS 22(a)/27 are absent from reviewed documents, the bailable, Magistrate-triable nature strongly implies such authority exists absent overrides. Courts have discharged in NDPS proceedings on procedural grounds 2025 Supreme(Online)(Bom) 4212 and upheld Magistrate powers in ancillary matters 2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 49694.

Recommendations (general):- File a discharge application before CJM, citing bailability precedents 2025 0 Supreme(Pat) 168 and CrPC/BNSS applicability.- Highlight no recovery or weak evidence, akin to bail grants without contraband recovery 2020 0 Supreme(P&H) 1535.- If denied, pursue revision under BNSS equivalents of CrPC 397/401.- Argue NDPS Section 37 inapplicable to small offences.

In conclusion, for minor NDPS offences, Magistrate powers under BNSS Section 250 appear intact, promoting justice against frivolous prosecutions. Stay informed on evolving jurisprudence, and always seek professional legal counsel.

References:- 2025 0 Supreme(Pat) 168, 2012 0 Supreme(Ker) 118, 2025 Supreme(Online)(Bom) 4212, 2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 49694,

Sudheer VS State of Kerala - Crimes (2012)