Married Daughter Cannot Be Excluded From Compassionate Appointment Solely On The Ground Of Marriage: Chhattisgarh High Court Allahabad HC Condemns Lawyers Seeking Adjournments To Attend District Courts Inherent Powers Under Section 151 CPC Cannot Be Invoked For Restoration Of Possession When Statutory Remedy Of Restitution Exists: Calcutta High Court Invoke Preventive Detention Laws Against Sand Mining Kingpins: Supreme Court Directs ED Probe To Protect Chambal Sanctuary Res Judicata Bars Pendente Lite Purchaser From Re-Agitating Impleadment Under Order XXII Rule 10 CPC If Rejected Under Order I Rule 10: Supreme Court Consumer Complaints Can Continue Against Promoters & Co-Developers Even If Corporate Debtor Is Under IBC Moratorium: Supreme Court IBC Moratorium Protects Only Corporate Debtor, Does Not Bar Consumer Complaints Against Promoters & Directors: Supreme Court Vehicle Registration Certificate Relevant But Not Conclusive For Deciding Interim Custody Under Section 451 CrPC: Supreme Court Lawyer Has No Unqualified Right To Continuous Presence During Entire Interrogation Under Section 38 BNSS: Supreme Court Mandating Continuous Videography Of Accused During Transit Is Unworkable, May Lead To Unfounded Allegations: Supreme Court Centre Introduces FCRA Amendment Bill 2026: Proposes Vesting Of Defunct NGO Assets In 'Designated Authority', Mandates Prior Nod For Probe Written Communication Of Grounds Of Arrest Not Mandatory For Arrests Prior To SC's 'Mihir Rajesh Shah' Judgment: Orissa High Court Passing Ex-Parte Maintenance Order Without Verifying Status Of WhatsApp Or Email Notice Violates Natural Justice: Madhya Pradesh High Court Training ChatGPT On Copyrighted News Is 'Fair Dealing', Does Not Amount To Infringement: Delhi High Court Refuses To Enjoin OpenAI Mere Reproduction Of Evidence Can Never Be Equated With Appreciation: Karnataka High Court Quashes Penalty Against Govt Employee Accused Cannot Repeatedly Send Cheque To FSL Till Favourable Report Is Obtained: Kerala High Court In NI Act Case Succession Certificate Cannot Be Issued For Gold Jewels Pledged With Bank, Applies Only To Debts And Securities: Madras High Court Order 11 Rule 14 CPC | Court Cannot Direct Production Of Documents Without Ascertaining They Are In Party's Possession: Calcutta High Court Undertrial Prisoners Don't Suffer 'Civil Death', Retain Fundamental Right To Alienate Property From Jail: Rajasthan High Court Direction For Reasonable Annual Enhancement Of Maintenance Under Section 125 CrPC Merely Preserves Its Real Value Against Inflation: Delhi High Court Testimony Of Sole Interested Witness Must Be Of 'Sterling Quality' To Base Conviction: Patna High Court Acquits Murder Convict Failure To Communicate Written Grounds Of Arrest Renders Arrest Constitutionally Infirm, Accused Entitled To Bail: Punjab & Haryana High Court Section 482 CrPC Petition Not Maintainable Against Order Framing Charge Under SC/ST Act, Appeal Lies Under Section 14A: Tripura High Court Disputed Questions Of Fact Regarding Title And Forged Documents Cannot Be Decided Under Article 226: Telangana High Court Matter To Be Enquired By Bar Council: Madhya Pradesh High Court Dismisses Lawyer's PILs With Costs For Suppressing Attorney-Client Relationship BDA Cannot Arbitrarily Reverse Resolutions Passed To Comply With Judicial Directives: Karnataka High Court Section 52A NDPS Act: Mere Non-Compliance Does Not Automatically Vitiate Trial Unless Evidence Is Doubtful: Punjab & Haryana High Court Rethinking Access to Justice: Proposing a Client-Choice Bar-Integrated Model as a Viable Alternative to the LADC System Delhi Police Grants Permission To Advocates To Protest At Jantar Mantar On August 7 Over LADC Concerns Seniority Must Be Determined From Date Of Substantive Appointment, Not Ad-Hoc Service: Allahabad High Court Uncorroborated Testimony Of Drug Inspector Cannot Form Sole Basis For Conviction Under Drugs Act: Andhra Pradesh High Court Suppression Of Adverse Facts Strikes At Root Of Equitable Jurisdiction: Bombay High Court Denies Injunction In HUF Property Dispute

Fair Trial and Investigation are Constitutional Rights: Rajasthan High Court Orders Fresh Probe in NDPS Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


Justice Anil Kumar Upman grants bail, citing biased investigation and directing further inquiry by senior officer.

In a landmark decision on April 20, 2024, the Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench, granted bail to Mukesh Kumar Khedar in a high-profile case involving charges under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act. Justice Anil Kumar Upman underscored the necessity of fair and transparent investigations, critiquing the initial probe as biased and incomplete. The court ordered a further investigation to be conducted by an officer of higher rank, setting a precedent for upholding constitutional rights and due process.

Mukesh Kumar Khedar, a pharmacist operating a medical store, was arrested on August 9, 2023, under Sections 8, 21, and 22 of the NDPS Act. The prosecution alleged that during routine checking, Khedar and a co-accused were found with 100 bottles of a prohibited cough syrup. The first bail application was dismissed, with the liberty to reapply post-charge sheet submission. Khedar’s defense claimed false implication and highlighted significant inconsistencies and fabrications in the police’s narrative, supported by CCTV footage and purchase invoices.

The court identified major flaws in the investigation, notably the disregard for crucial CCTV footage and purchase bills provided by Khedar’s father. Justice Upman remarked, “Fair trial and investigation are part of constitutional rights guaranteed under Articles 20 and 21 of the Constitution of India. The investigating agency cannot be permitted to conduct an investigation in a tainted and biased manner.”

The judgment emphasized the constitutional mandate for unbiased and transparent investigations. It cited the Supreme Court’s rulings in Vinay Tyagi vs. Irshad Ali and Babubayi vs. State of Gujarat, stressing that an investigation must seek the truth without prejudice. “The Investigating Officer’s primary responsibility in a fair and just society is to ascertain the truth,” the court noted.

Acknowledging the biased conduct of the original Investigating Officer (IO), the court directed the Superintendent of Police, Sikar, to assign the case to an officer not below the rank of Additional Superintendent of Police. This directive aims to ensure a thorough and unbiased investigation, with instructions for expeditious completion within three months.

Justice Upman stated, “The IO has not considered the important material (CCTV footage and bills, etc.) produced by the father of the petitioner by way of detailed representation. This Court being a constitutional court cannot shut its eyes towards defective investigation, which can/should be cured by directing further investigation.”

The High Court’s decision to grant bail to Mukesh Kumar Khedar, coupled with the order for a fresh investigation, underscores the judiciary’s commitment to upholding justice and constitutional rights. This ruling sets a significant precedent for ensuring fair investigations and protecting individuals from biased and incomplete legal proceedings. The implications of this decision are expected to reinforce the principles of justice and due process in future cases involving the NDPS Act and beyond.

Date of Decision: April 20, 2024

Mukesh Kumar Khedar vs. State of Rajasthan

 

Latest Legal News