High Court directs Haryana DGP to file affidavit on cops not deposing in drug cases

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has directed the Director-General of Police, Haryana, to file an affidavit explaining the repeated failure of prosecution witnesses, particularly police personnel, to appear before the trial court in cases under the NDPS Act.

The court has expressed concern over the systemic delays caused by such absences, which infringe upon the fundamental right to a speedy trial as guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

"A Co-ordinate Bench of this Court has previously taken note of a distressing pattern in the State of Punjab, where trials under the NDPS Act have been repeatedly delayed due to the non-appearance of prosecution witnesses. However, this issue is not confined to Punjab alone. A similar but a more pronounced trend has also emerged in the State of Haryana, where the repeated failure of prosecution witnesses to appear before the trial court has led to unwarranted delays in the adjudication of cases. Such systemic lapses not only obstruct the course of justice but also directly impinge upon the fundamental rights of the accused," Justice Harpreet Singh Brar observed.

The court further stated, "The records from the trial court reveal that cases under the NDPS Act have been repeatedly adjourned due to the absence of prosecution witnesses, most of whom are police officials. This has led to unjustified and prolonged delays in the trial, entirely due to the negligence of the prosecution, thereby infringing upon the petitioners’ fundamental right to a speedy trial and their personal liberty as guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India."

Emphasising the legal principle, Justice Brar asserted, "The right to a speedy trial is an essential facet of the fundamental right to life and personal liberty enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has repeatedly emphasised that unjustified delays in criminal trials amount to a violation of this cherished right, as prolonged incarceration without conclusion of proceedings subjects an accused to unnecessary hardship, mental agony, and social stigma. The principle of speedy trial is rooted in the broader framework of justice, ensuring that individuals are not indefinitely deprived of their freedom due to systemic inefficiencies or prosecutorial lapses. Any delay in the judicial process not only prejudices the rights of the accused but also weakens public confidence in the legal system. It is the duty of the State to ensure that trials are conducted efficiently, as unnecessary delays lead to prolonged incarceration, which, in itself, becomes a form of punishment before conviction. Therefore, any failure on the part of the prosecution to secure the attendance of witnesses, particularly police officials, must be viewed as an infringement of this fundamental right, warranting strict accountability and corrective measures."

Addressing the gravity of drug-related offenses, Justice Brat noted, "Strict compliance with procedural mandates and the timely disposal of cases under the NDPS Act are of paramount importance, given the grave menace that narcotic substances pose to society. The illicit trade and consumption of drugs have far-reaching social and economic consequences, fuelling crime, endangering public health, and undermining societal stability. Recognizing the severity of the issue, the legislature in its wisdom has imposed stringent provisions under the NDPS Act to ensure that offenders are brought to justice without undue delay. Any laxity in the prosecution of such cases not only weakens the deterrent effect of the law but also emboldens those engaged in drug-related offenses. It is, therefore, imperative that trials under this Act are conducted with utmost urgency, ensuring both the swift punishment of the guilty and the protection of the innocent from prolonged incarceration."

Directing immediate action, Justice Brar stated, "Since this Court cannot remain oblivious to the seriousness of this issue, the Director General of Police, Haryana, is accordingly directed to submit an affidavit explaining the consistent failure of prosecution witnesses, particularly police personnel, to appear in court for cases under the NDPS Act. This malady further adds to the already mounting backlog of cases. Such persistent dereliction of duty erodes the integrity of the judicial process and deprives the accused of their fundamental right to a fair and timely trial."

Referring to previous judicial observations, Justice Brar asserted, "As also pointed out by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, authorities must take immediate and effective measures to rectify this situation. Any continued negligence on the part of the prosecution will not be condoned, and the State counsel will find it difficult to oppose bail applications in cases where the accused remain incarcerated solely due to the failure of the prosecution to discharge its responsibilities and ensure timely disposal of cases. If such delays persist, they will severely weaken the case of the prosecution and diminish the ability of the State to ensure the fair administration of justice."