The Kerala High Court has made it clear that drug offences will not be taken lightly as a five-judge Bench examines whether even possession of small quantities can justify branding offenders as “goondas” under KAAPA. The ruling could reshape how repeat drug offences are treated, with the Court stressing deterrence, rehabilitation, and protection of the next generation.
The Kerala High Court on Wednesday made it clear that it wants to send a strong signal to society that drug-related offences will not be tolerated. A five-judge Full Bench of the Court said that strict action is necessary to prevent drug abuse, especially among young people, and stressed that deterrence should begin from the very first offence.
The Full Bench, comprising Justices Devan Ramachandran, P Gopinath, A Badharudeen, MB Snehalatha, and Jobin Sebastian, was hearing a reference that raises important questions on how drug offences should be treated under the law.
ALSO READ: Delhi Court Calls for Action Against Investigating Officer in NDPS Case
During the hearing, Justice Devan Ramachandran strongly observed that persons caught in drug cases must be dealt with firmly from the beginning itself.
He said,
“Deterrence must come at the first offence. They must be taken to the hospital for rehab immediately. But there is a lack of facilities. Smart parents will do this when their children get in trouble because they have the resources…We have to send a message to society that at least the High Court of Kerala will not tolerate violations of the NDPS Act (Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act).”
The judge expressed concern over the present situation where those caught with small quantities of drugs are often punished lightly. According to him, this approach has only made things worse, as offenders continue carrying small quantities repeatedly, thereby spreading drug abuse in society.
He questioned the direction in which society is heading and said,
“Where are we going when kids are walking around with marijuana? What does it mean when you are emboldened by certain provisions of NDPS Act to continue committing offences?”
Justice Ramachandran further shared his personal view that even first-time offenders caught with small quantities of drugs should be sent to rehabilitation centres without delay. He said that simply imposing a fine or letting them go on bail does not solve the problem.
Explaining his stance, he stated,
“My personal view, which may not be shared by anybody else, is that even those who come in which small offences should be sent to rehab. They should never come back as a drug offender. Here we slap a penalty. And we publicise it heavily after catching the children of important people. But it is bailable and they are sent after paying a fine,”
At this stage of the hearing, the Court reiterated the concern once again by stating,
“Where are we going when kids are walking around with marijuana?”
The case came up before the Full Bench while reconsidering an earlier judgment delivered by a three-judge Bench in Suhana v. State of Kerala. In that case, the Court had set aside a preventive detention order passed under the Kerala Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 2007 (KAAPA).
The earlier Bench had ruled that mere possession of a small quantity of drugs does not automatically make a person a “drug-offender” or a “goonda” unless there is evidence to show that the person intended to sell the drugs.
However, later Benches of the Kerala High Court expressed doubts about whether that interpretation was correct. Due to these concerns, the issue was referred to a five-judge Full Bench for reconsideration.
One of the key legal issues before the Court arises from the wording of KAAPA. While Section 2(i) of KAAPA defines a “drug-offender” using the word “stocks,” the NDPS Act treats even possession of drugs as a criminal offence. This has led to confusion over whether mere possession can be treated as stocking under KAAPA.
The main question the Court is now examining is whether possession of drugs, especially repeated possession of small quantities, can amount to “stocking” or qualify as “anti-social activity” under KAAPA. The earlier ruling in Suhana had taken the view that while stocking includes possession, possession alone does not necessarily mean stocking.
During the hearing, Justice Ramachandran questioned this reasoning and asked why a person who is repeatedly found with small quantities of drugs should not be presumed to be stocking drugs.
The Full Bench is also examining whether an accused person’s conduct must satisfy both the definition of “anti-social activity” and “drug-offender” to be labelled as a “goonda” under KAAPA.
Justice P Gopinath highlighted the importance of interpreting the definition correctly and said,
“My personal view is that everything in this case turns on the definition of drug offender, because drug offender leads to goonda. So, everything essentially turns around in the interpretation that we might place on the definition of drug offender,”
Justice Ramachandran went a step further and said that the very act of procuring and consuming drugs can be considered anti-social, especially in the larger context of national security. He pointed out the global link between drug trafficking and terrorism and remarked,
“You are consuming drugs, knowing it to be bad. You are consuming it without telling us where you’re getting it from. The fact of you getting it itself is antisocial. This could, as well, be cannabis coming from Afghanistan, funding terror. And it is known internationally that every activity of terrorism is funded by drugs. Is that not anti-social?”
Summing up the core issue, Justice A Badharudeen observed that the Court must carefully examine the intention of the Legislature while framing KAAPA. He said,
“What we have to see now is whether the Legislature had any intention to make it so that not all drug offenders are brought under KAAPA. And whether that is why they brought in different categories, such as stocking, cultivating, etc.”
ALSO READ: Synthetic Drug & Ganja Has Reached Schools: Kerala High Court Over 330% Rise In Cases
The Court indicated that it will continue hearing the matter next week, as the issue has serious legal and social implications.
Concluding the hearing, Justice Ramachandran emphasised that the case goes beyond technical legal interpretation and concerns the future of society itself. He said,
“The purpose of this exercise (full Bench hearing) is not merely legal; we are looking at the next generation, at the future of this country,”
Click Here to Read Previous Reports on Drug Crimes
