Supreme Court Cancels Bail in Narcotics Case Involving International Drug Syndicate image for SC Judgment dated 08-03-2021 in the case of Union of India vs Prateek Shukla
| |

Supreme Court Cancels Bail in Narcotics Case Involving International Drug Syndicate

The Supreme Court of India recently delivered a landmark judgment in Union of India v. Prateek Shukla, overturning the bail granted by the Allahabad High Court in a serious drug trafficking case under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act). The case involved allegations of the illegal procurement and diversion of acetic anhydride, a controlled substance used in drug manufacturing.

Background of the Case

The case began on October 18, 2018, when the Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) received information about large-scale procurement of acetic anhydride by Altruist Chemicals Private Limited. The company had failed to submit quarterly returns as required under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (Regulation of Control Substances) Order, 2013, raising suspicions of diversion for illegal activities.

The NCB conducted a raid at the company’s registered office in Noida, which was found locked. Upon breaking the lock, officials discovered 896 grams of acetic anhydride and 1.885 kg of amphetamine. Further investigations led to the seizure of 9,650 kg of acetic anhydride from a godown in Ghaziabad.

Read also: https://judgmentlibrary.com/dowry-death-and-criminal-liability-supreme-court-upholds-conviction-in-karnataka-bride-burning-case/

The respondent, Prateek Shukla, along with co-accused Himanshu Rana and Bismillah Khan Ahmadzai, was implicated as part of an international drug syndicate involved in the illegal diversion and trafficking of controlled substances.

Petitioner’s Arguments (Union of India)

The Union of India, through the Additional Solicitor General, argued:

  • The case involved an organized drug syndicate with international links, requiring strict enforcement of the NDPS Act.
  • Prateek Shukla, despite claiming to have resigned as director, was still linked to the company at the time of illegal transactions.
  • Large-scale procurement and storage of acetic anhydride pointed to its intended use in the manufacture of banned substances.
  • Under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, the burden of proof is on the accused, but the High Court wrongly shifted this burden onto the prosecution.
  • The High Court failed to consider the seriousness of the allegations before granting bail.

Respondent’s Arguments (Prateek Shukla)

Prateek Shukla’s defense counsel contended:

  • He had resigned as the director of Altruist Chemicals on May 4, 2018, before the illegal transactions took place.
  • The quarterly returns for the period January–March 2018 had been duly filed.
  • He had no role in the purchases of acetic anhydride that took place after his resignation.
  • The NCB was unfairly implicating him without direct evidence of his involvement in the illegal transactions.

Supreme Court’s Observations

The bench comprising Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud and M.R. Shah made the following crucial observations:

1. Misapplication of Bail Principles

“Ex facie, there has been no application of mind by the High Court to the seriousness of the allegations involving an offence punishable under the NDPS Act.”

The Court noted that the High Court granted bail merely because the accused was educated and had a clean past, without analyzing the seriousness of the offense.

2. Ignoring the Legal Provisions of the NDPS Act

“The provisions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act provide the legal norms which have to be applied in determining whether a case for grant of bail has been made out.”

The Supreme Court criticized the High Court for failing to consider the stringent requirements under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, which restricts the granting of bail unless the accused proves that they are not guilty and are unlikely to commit any offense if released.

Read also: https://judgmentlibrary.com/cheque-bounce-case-and-criminal-liability-supreme-courts-verdict-on-section-138-of-the-negotiable-instruments-act/

3. Lack of Proper Consideration of Evidence

“The respondent’s role must be assessed with reference to the allegations in the criminal complaint, which clearly establish his connection with the illicit drug operations.”

The Supreme Court pointed out that the High Court failed to examine documentary evidence showing Shukla’s continued involvement with the company even after his alleged resignation.

4. International Links and Syndicate Operations

“The application for bail and the counter-affidavit filed in the proceedings suppress more than what they disclose.”

The Court highlighted that co-accused Bismillah Khan Ahmadzai was an Afghan national, and the syndicate had transnational connections, which warranted a stricter judicial approach.

Supreme Court’s Verdict

The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Union of India, stating:

  • The bail granted by the High Court was set aside.
  • Prateek Shukla’s bail was canceled, and he was directed to surrender immediately.
  • The case should proceed as per the stringent provisions of the NDPS Act.

Conclusion

The judgment reinforces the stringent provisions of the NDPS Act in dealing with drug-related offenses. It serves as a precedent for courts to follow strict scrutiny before granting bail in cases involving organized drug trafficking. The ruling ensures that international drug syndicates do not exploit legal loopholes to evade justice.

Read also: https://judgmentlibrary.com/supreme-court-upholds-conviction-in-haryana-dowry-death-case/


Petitioner Name: Union of India.
Respondent Name: Prateek Shukla.
Judgment By: Justice Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, Justice M.R. Shah.
Place Of Incident: Noida, Ghaziabad.
Judgment Date: 08-03-2021.

Don’t miss out on the full details! Download the complete judgment in PDF format below and gain valuable insights instantly!

Download Judgment: union-of-india-vs-prateek-shukla-supreme-court-of-india-judgment-dated-08-03-2021.pdf

Directly Download Judgment: Directly download this Judgment

See all petitions in Drug Possession Cases
See all petitions in Bail and Anticipatory Bail
See all petitions in Money Laundering Cases
See all petitions in Judgment by Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud
See all petitions in Judgment by Mukeshkumar Rasikbhai Shah
See all petitions in allowed
See all petitions in Quashed
See all petitions in supreme court of India judgments March 2021
See all petitions in 2021 judgments

See all posts in Criminal Cases Category
See all allowed petitions in Criminal Cases Category
See all Dismissed petitions in Criminal Cases Category
See all partially allowed petitions in Criminal Cases Category

Similar Posts