Saurabh Malik
Chandigarh, October 30
Making it clear that drug peddlers have “successfully destroyed the social fabric of our society and led youth on the wrongful path”, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has ruled that such type of persons were required to be dealt with firmly and sternly. Sympathy could not be shown to them lest it proved to be counterproductive and resulted in an increase in drug trafficking.
The assertion by Justice Ashok Kumar Verma of the High Court came in an alleged cross-border drugs smuggling case. The matter was placed before Justice Verma’s Bench after an accused in the case filed a petition against the state of Punjab and other respondents for grant of regular bail.
No sympathy for them
No sympathy can be shown to drug peddlers lest that should prove to be counterproductive and result in rise in trafficking. —Justice Ashok Kumar Verma
An FIR in the matter was registered on March 12, 2020, under the provisions of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, the Indian Passport Act and the Foreigners Act at the Lopoke police station in Amritsar.
The Bench was told that the petitioner was apprehended on the basis of secret information that he and a co-accused were involved in smuggling of “huge quantity of heroin from Pakistan with the help of their Pak counterpart”. The petitioner, during interrogation, made a disclosure statement and got eight packets of heroin weighing 10 kg seized from the disclosed place.
After hearing rival contentions and going through the documents, Justice Verma asserted that the allegations against the petitioner were “very serious in nature which needs no leniency at this stage”. Elaborating, Justice Verma observed that the bags were seized on the basis of disclosure statement in the presence of the then DSP, Attari, Amritsar (Rural), and officials of the Border Security Force from wheat fields “across fencing”.
Justice Verma observed further investigations revealed that the petitioner had purchased two residential houses in Amritsar district with drug trafficking money. Appropriate opportunity was given to the petitioner to defend his case, but he did not appear.
Join Whatsapp Channel of The Tribune for latest updates.