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

Share:
bail ndps bail accused Certified 91 ndps Bail Bail Evidence Bail NDPS NDPS custody investigation ganja NDPS Acquittal acquits PITNDPS

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.

Defective Investigation:

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.”

Bias and Fairness:

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.

Further Investigation Ordered:

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

Download Judgment

Share: