Punjab & Haryana High Court Hands NDPS Probe to CBI After Finding Police Version on Accused’s Custody Doubtful
Court Quashes Charge-Framing Order, Orders Fresh CBI Investigation After Key Witness Contradicts Police Account
In a significant ruling underscoring the importance of a fair and credible criminal investigation, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has transferred the investigation of an NDPS case to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) after finding serious inconsistencies in the police’s version regarding the detention, release and subsequent re-arrest of the accused. The Court also quashed the trial court’s order framing charges, holding that the foundation of the prosecution case had become doubtful.
Justice Jasjit Singh Bedi passed the order while allowing a petition filed by Kusum Rani and another petitioner in connection with an FIR registered on August 12, 2024, under Section 22(C) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act at Adampur Police Station in Hisar, Haryana. The petitioners had sought an independent investigation by the CBI or another impartial agency, alleging serious irregularities in the police investigation.
The High Court found that the prosecution’s narrative regarding the accused’s custody was contradicted by a crucial individual to whom the police claimed the accused had been handed over after his release. That individual categorically denied the police version, casting substantial doubt on the sequence of events presented by the investigating agency. The Court observed that this contradiction went to the root of the prosecution’s case and raised serious concerns about the credibility of the investigation.
Observing that the police account appeared “somewhat doubtful,” the Court held that permitting the trial to continue on the basis of such an investigation would not serve the interests of justice. Consequently, the Bench set aside the order dated November 13, 2024, by which the trial court had framed charges against the accused.
The High Court directed the CBI to undertake a further investigation into the case. It clarified that both the original police report and the supplementary report to be filed by the CBI should be placed before the trial court, which will thereafter proceed in accordance with law. While issuing these directions, the Court relied on the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in Vinay Tyagi v. Irshad Ali @ Deepak, governing further investigation and consideration of supplementary reports.
To avoid unnecessary delay, the Court directed the CBI to make every effort to complete the further investigation within three months. The Bench emphasized that an impartial and legally sustainable investigation is essential, particularly in prosecutions under the NDPS Act, where convictions often carry severe penalties and procedural safeguards assume heightened importance.
The judgment reinforces the principle that courts possess the authority to order an independent investigation whenever the existing probe appears unreliable or suffers from material contradictions. The High Court observed that maintaining public confidence in the criminal justice system requires investigations that are objective, transparent and free from doubts capable of undermining the prosecution’s credibility.
Legal experts believe the ruling is an important reminder that while offences under the NDPS Act are treated with exceptional seriousness, investigative agencies are equally expected to adhere to the highest standards of fairness and accuracy. Where the very basis of the prosecution is rendered questionable by contradictory evidence, constitutional courts may intervene to protect the integrity of the criminal justice process by directing an independent investigation.
