RIGHT TO FAIR TRIAL IN NDPS CASES: EXAMINING POLICE MISUSE OF INVESTIGATIVE POWERS

AUTHOR – TANAY KALIA* & NIKUNJ SINGH YADAV**

* STUDENT AT LAW COLLEGE DEHRADUN UTTARANCHAL UNIVERSITY

** ASSISTANT PROFESSOR LAW AT LAW COLLEGE DEHRADUN UTTARANCHAL UNIVERSITY

BEST CITATION – TANAY KALIA & NIKUNJ SINGH YADAV, RIGHT TO FAIR TRIAL IN NDPS CASES: EXAMINING POLICE MISUSE OF INVESTIGATIVE POWERS, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 5 (4) OF 2025, PG. 538-554, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344.

ABSTRACT

This article examines with great concern the systematic withdrawal of fair trial rights in narcotic prosecutions under India’s Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act of 1985, with particular emphasis on police abuses of investigative powers. The NDPS Act, framed to combat drug trafficking, grants considerable leeway to enforcement agencies with respect to warrantless searches, reverse burden of proof, and restrictive bail conditions conflicting in many instances with constitutional safeguards guaranteed to Article 21. This study analyzes procedural shortcomings, drawing from doctrinal analysis and a case law review based largely on the period between 2023 and 2025, regarding major and minor cases involving unlawful search (in violation of Section 50), fabricated evidence (Section 42), and coerced confession (Section 53). Judicial pronouncements such as Pauline Nalwoga v. Customs and Lovepreet Singh Case recount violations that have recurred against the backdrop of systemic failure in enforcing procedural safeguards. The pattern of intrusion into investigations, procedural formalisms, and structural deficits against the accused, especially when they are marginalized, that has emerged through the findings is dire. Over the years, courts have been attempting to correct this imbalance through sophisticated interpretations in favor of substantive justice as against procedural compliance. Yet, a lack of coherence in the jurisprudence and legislative inertia have kept holding the way for meaningful reform. The article urges for the amendment of statutes, initiation of independent monitoring bodies, early provision of legal aid, and measures for the integrity of evidence to ensure that the NDPS is executed in conformity with constitutional standards. Such reform is necessary, lest the deterrent spirit of the Act gets transformed into institutionalized oppression, offending personal liberties and the credibility of the criminal justice system in India.

Keywords: NDPS Act, fair trial rights, Article 21, police misuse, reverse burden of proof, Section 50 compliance, procedural safeguards, judicial reform