HC flags rising drone-based drug smuggling, calls for stringent action

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has expressed grave concern over the rising instances of drug smuggling into India through drones from across the Pakistan border, warning that the menace poses a direct threat to national security and public health. Observing that the introduction of unmanned aerial vehicles made drug trafficking more cost-efficient and sophisticated, the court also called for adoption of urgent stringent legal measures to curb the illicit trade.

Justice Harpreet Singh Brar asserted that the court found it an urgent necessity to note the steady increase in cross-border smuggling of illicit drugs. “The introduction of drones as a mode of trafficking has provided a cost-efficient shift towards unmanned methods of trafficking. The increasing instances of drug smuggling into India through drones from across the Pakistan border pose a grave threat to national security and public health,” the court asserted.

Justice Brar added the illicit trade not only fuelled organised crime but also had a devastating impact on the youth. “The easy availability of narcotics weakens the moral and social fabric of the nation, impeding the progress of future generations. The court recognises that such offenses are not mere violations of law but have serious implications on the security and development of the State, necessitating stringent legal action,” the court added.

The assertion came as Justice Brar denied anticipatory bail in cross-border drug smuggling case. An FIR in the matter was registered at Kalanaur police station in Gurdaspur district under the provisions of the NDPS Act and the Aircraft Act, 1934. The prosecution's case was that BSF officials at Chanduwadala border outpost heard the sound of a drone and immediately launched a search operation on February 1. They apprehended two individuals before recovering 550 grams of heroin, two mobile phones, and a motorcycle

The Bench was told that the co-accused named petitioner Sakater Singh as one of the “offenders”. Opposing the plea, the State counsel contended that the petitioner was “linchpin of the drug trafficking”. The drugs were sent by drone from Pakistan, while the petitioner orchestrated the entire delivery of contraband in India. He relayed the location of the co-accused to the drug peddler in Pakistan.

The petitioner, on the other hand, argued that he had clean antecedents and had been falsely implicated. There was no evidence with the investigating agency to remotely connect the petitioner with the alleged recovery of the contraband from the conscious and exclusive possession of the co-accused.

Finding that the investigation was still in its nascent stage, the court ruled: “The custodial interrogation of the petitioner is imperative to unearth the truth and the modus operandi how the smuggling of drugs through drones has been carried out. Therefore, no ground is made out to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner and, thus, the present petition is hereby dismissed”.