Vexatious Search Charge Under Section 58 NDPS: Supreme Court Quashes Special Judge's Proceedings Against Police Officer

In January 2005 police recovered 8.7 kg of opium from a man in Kurukshetra; on a complaint the appellant, then SP, ordered an inquiry, which concluded that three others had planted the opium, and they were charge-sheeted instead (para 2). In February 2007 the Special Judge convicted the original accused, acquitted the three, called the police story false and ordered notices under Section 58 of the NDPS Act to the appellant and two officers (paras 2, 15). Once the High Court declined to interfere, the judge listed the matter seven times in ten days and, after his own transfer, dictated an order on 30.05.2008 in a sealed cover; the High Court upheld this on 14.10.2010 (paras 2, 35).

Section 58 punishes vexatious entry, search, seizure or arrest with up to six months, and malicious false information with up to two years (paras 19-20). Since Section 36-A(5) requires offences punishable with not more than three years to be tried summarily, and, as noted in Tofan Singh, only graver offences are exclusively triable by the Special Court, the Special Judge could not conduct Section 58 proceedings; only a Magistrate following the summons-case procedure could (paras 21-26). Section 69 protects acts done in good faith, which, following Rashtriya Rifles, is presumed and can be displaced only by cogent material (paras 27-31). The adverse findings were recorded only on the acquitted accused's arguments at the final hearing, without notice or hearing, contrary to Babu Chakraborthy (paras 32-35). The hurried hearings after the transfer order offended the principle that justice must be seen to be done (paras 35-37). On opening the sealed cover, the Court found the order predetermined: it treated the trial judgment as final although appeals against it were pending (para 39).