NDPS Act: Supreme Court to examine whether chargesheet without FSL report is incomplete

The Supreme Court is slated to examine whether a chargesheet filed without a Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) report in a case under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act), can be termed as an 'incomplete report' under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) [Mohd. Arbaz and Others v. State of NCT of Delhi]..A three-judge Bench of Justices Surya Kant, Sudhanshu Dhulia and Ujjal Bhuyan will also examine various related aspects that concern the fairness and efficacy of the trials under the NDPS Act..A three-judge Bench of Justices Surya Kant, Sudhanshu Dhulia and Ujjal Bhuyan will also examine various related aspects that concern the fairness and efficacy of the trials under the NDPS Act.The additional questions that the Court agreed to consider were regarding the following aspects:- Establishment of adequate Forensic Science/Examiner Laboratories by the State Governments along with appointment of requisite technical staff to operate such laboratories;- Current status of the Forensic Science/ Examiner’s Laboratories;- Creation of a robust mechanism for submission of the FSL/ Examiner’s Reports within the stipulated period;- Follow up action taken by the States in compliance of the decision in Union of India v. Mohan Lal and Another (2016), wherein directions were issued to set-up storage facilities for adequate storage of contrabands..On July 18, the Court sought the response of the Central government, all States and Union Territories (UTs) on these larger questions and posted the matter for hearing on August 29."We propose to hear all the States and the Union Territories before any effective directions are issued. We, therefore, direct the Registry to issue notices to the Union of India, all the States and the Union Territories, returnable on 29.08.2024," the order stated..The Court was hearing a batch of appeals arising from a November 2020 decision of the Delhi High Court which had refused to grant bail to three persons booked under Sections 21 and 29 NDPS Act for allegedly carrying around 20 kg of contraband.Before the High Court, the accused submitted that the report (chargesheet) filed by the investigating agency under Section 173, CrPC did not contain a report of the chemical examiner who had tested the alleged contraband.Therefore, the accused contended that the chargesheet was incomplete and that they were entitled for default bail (bail granted for a failure to submit the chargesheet within the prescribed time) under Section 167, CrPC.A trial court had earlier refused to accept the contention that the report was incomplete in absence of the examiner's report while rejecting the default bail plea.The High Court set aside the finding of the trial court on the limited aspect of whether a final report was incomplete without an examiner's report. However, it upheld rejection of the default bail plea after finding that the final report (chargesheet) had been filed within time. Aggrieved by rejection of their bail plea, the accused persons approached the apex court for relief.In December 2021, the top court granted interim bail to the accused persons, considering the period of jail time already undergone. This interim bail was extended from time to time by the Court, including on July 18..[Read Order]