Drugs in 65 cases missing: Punjab Police to HC

Saurabh Malik

Tribune News Service

Chandigarh, November 19

In a shocking revelation, the Punjab and Haryana High Court was told that contraband in about 65 criminal cases had been stolen or had gone missing. A letter to this effect, purportedly written by Ludhiana Commissioner of Police on March 26, was placed before the High Court during the hearing of a case.

Taking up a drugs-related case, Justice Amol Rattan Singh also pulled up the police for not showing correct manner of arrest “all too often”. The Bench said the system of checks and balances was “obviously missing” as only police officers were being made incharge of committees to oversee the disposal of drugs.

‘No check in place’

• Justice Amol Rattan Singh pulled up the police for not showing correct manner of arrest ‘all too often’
• The Bench said the system of checks and balances was ‘obviously missing’ with only police officers being made incharge of panels for disposal of drugs and psychotropic substances

Justice Amol Rattan Singh asserted this was possibly why the committees were not meeting as often as they were required to for ensuring the destruction of contraband that was no longer case property. “Actually, the committee would need to be headed by a senior IAS officer so as to try and ensure that the contraband is not misused,” the Bench observed.

Justice Amol Rattan Singh also directed State counsel Gaurav Garg Dhuriwala to bring the matter regarding the letter to the notice of the High Court judges’ committee constituted by the Chief Justice pursuant to orders passed by the Supreme Court on the issue of contraband disposal. Advocate Ishan Gupta was also asked to assist the court.

In his detailed order, Justice Amol Rattan Singh asserted that the letter, possibly addressed to the Additional Director-General of Police, Special Task Force, had been produced before the court in connection with another matter. Its copy had been given to the State counsel appearing in the case for confirmation.

Justice Amol Rattan Singh added it was required to be specifically stated by the court and was not a general observation that every now and then, a matter cropped up where it was seen that “persons were being shown to be arrested from different places with contraband shown to be recovered from them”. But as per videographic evidence presented before the court for those petitions, they were shown to be picked up from their homes or different places at completely different times and even dates.

“The impression that this court has gathered over the years is that possibly most of those persons shown to be arrested may be persons who are actually indulging in buying/selling of contraband or are at least suspected of doing so. However, the manner of arrest is all too often not shown to be correct and in fact is shown to be in a completely different manner to the actual arrest, simply because the investigating agency decided to adopt ‘short cuts’…,” Justice Amol Rattan Singh added.