Rafiq Qureshi v. Narcotic Control Bureau Eastern Zonal Unit ,(2019) 6 SCC 492

INTRODUCTION:

The case Rafiq Qureshi v. Narcotic Control Bureau Eastern Zonal Unit (2019) 6 SCC 492 involves the Supreme Court of India addressing the conviction of Rafiq Qureshi under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act. Qureshi challenged his arrest and the evidence collected by the Narcotic Control Bureau, alleging procedural violations and infringement of his legal rights. The Supreme Court examined the procedural adherence and evidentiary standards in narcotic cases, emphasizing the importance of balancing stringent drug control measures with the protection of constitutional rights. The judgment is significant for its impact on narcotic law enforcement and procedural fairness in India.

FACT OF THE CASE:

The appellant, Rafiq Qureshi, was apprehended by officers of the Narcotic Control Bureau (NCB), Eastern Zonal Unit, based on credible information regarding his involvement in the trafficking of narcotic substances. Upon arrest, a substantial quantity of illegal narcotic drugs was allegedly recovered from his possession. The appellant was charged under various sections of the NDPS Act, 1985 (Sections 8, 21, 22, and 29).

That, the prosecution's case hinged on the evidence gathered during the raid, including the seized narcotics and statements recorded from witnesses. The appellant contended that the investigation was marred by procedural irregularities, specifically alleging that the mandatory safeguards under the NDPS Act were not adhered to. He argued that the search and seizure operations were conducted without proper compliance with legal provisions, thereby rendering the evidence inadmissible.

Thereafter, the appellant claimed that his rights under the Constitution of India were violated during the course of the investigation and trial. He maintained that there were lapses in the chain of custody of the seized narcotics and discrepancies in the testimonies of prosecution witnesses.

The trial court convicted Rafiq Qureshi based on the evidence presented by the NCB, a decision subsequently upheld by the High Court. Aggrieved by the concurrent findings, the appellant approached the Supreme Court, challenging the legality of his conviction and the procedures followed by the investigating agency.

ISSUE RAISED:

1.     Whether the procedures outlined in Section 32B of the NDPS Act were adhered to during the investigation and trial.

2.     Whether the trial court had the authority to impose a punishment greater than the minimum term of imprisonment prescribed under the Act.

3.     Whether the trial court could consider factors beyond those listed in clauses (a) to (f) of Section 32B when imposing a sentence higher than the minimum term.

CONTENTIONS OF THE APPELLANT:

That, the appellant contained search and seizure operations were conducted without proper compliance with the legal provisions outlined in the NDPS Act, thereby rendering the evidence inadmissible.

There were procedural irregularities, including lapses in the chain of custody of the seized narcotics. his constitutional rights were violated during the investigation and trial.

The trial court imposed a punishment greater than the minimum term prescribed under the NDPS Act without proper justification.

The trial court considered factors beyond those listed in clauses (a) to (f) of Section 32B when imposing a higher sentence.

CONTENTIONS OF THE RESPONDENT:

The investigation and search operations were conducted in compliance with the legal provisions of the NDPS Act.

The evidence, including the seized narcotics and witness statements, was sufficient to establish the guilt of the appellant beyond a reasonable doubt.

The trial court had the authority to impose a punishment greater than the minimum term prescribed under the NDPS Act, considering the gravity of the offense.

The trial court's decision to impose a higher sentence was justified based on the circumstances of the case.

JUDGEMENT:

The Supreme Court in Rafiq Qureshi v. Narcotic Control Bureau Eastern Zonal Unit (2019) 6 SCC 492 upheld the conviction of Rafiq Qureshi under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act. The Court emphasized the critical need for strict adherence to procedural safeguards outlined in the NDPS Act to maintain the integrity of the investigation and trial processes. Despite the appellant's contentions regarding procedural irregularities and violations of constitutional rights, the Court found that the evidence collected, including the seized narcotics, was admissible and sufficient to sustain the conviction. The Court also affirmed that the trial court had the authority to impose a punishment greater than the minimum term prescribed under the Act, as long as the decision was justified by the circumstances of the case. The judgment highlights the delicate balance between enforcing stringent drug control measures and protecting individual rights within the legal framework.

CONCLUSION:

The Supreme Court in Rafiq Qureshi v. Narcotic Control Bureau Eastern Zonal Unit (2019) 6 SCC 492 upheld Rafiq Qureshi's conviction under the NDPS Act, affirming the trial court's adherence to procedural safeguards and validating the admissibility of evidence despite alleged procedural lapses. The Court also confirmed the trial court's authority to impose a punishment greater than the minimum prescribed, provided it was justified by the case's circumstances. This judgment highlights the balance between stringent drug control enforcement and the protection of individual rights.

REFERENCE:

https://indiankanoon.org 

Rafiq Qureshi v. Narcotic Control Bureau, Eastern Zonal Unit . | Supreme Court Of India | Judgment | Law | CaseMine

This Article is written by Akansha Koshta.