The Supreme Court will re-examine how “small” and “commercial” drug quantities are calculated under the NDPS Act, questioning its 2020 ruling in Hira Singh. The decision could change punishments and bail conditions in narcotics cases.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court of India on Monday decided to once again look into the legal question of how “small” and “commercial” quantities of narcotic drugs should be calculated under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act. T
he case has come up where the petitioner has challenged the earlier interpretation given by the Court in 2020.
A Bench of Justices MM Sundresh and NK Singh has issued notice in a writ petition that questions the correctness of the 2020 decision in Hira Singh v. Union of India.
In that case, the Court had agreed with a government notification that said, for the purpose of classifying seized drugs as small, intermediate, or commercial in quantity, the entire weight of the mixture or solution must be considered, and not just the pure drug content.
The controversy began with a Central government notification dated November 18, 2009, which amended the earlier 2001 notification prescribing threshold limits for drugs.
By adding Note 4, the amendment clarified that the entire mixture containing narcotic drugs or psychotropic substances would be treated as the relevant quantity.
The 2009 notification says:
“The quantities shown in Column 5 and Column 6 of the Table relating to the respective drugs shown in Column 2 shall apply to the entire mixture or any solution or any one or more narcotic drugs or psychotropic substances of that particular drug in dosage form or isomers, esters, ethers, and salts of these drugs, including salts of esters, ethers and isomers, wherever existence of such substance is possible and not just its Pure drug content .”
The petitioner in this case has argued that this rule is unfair, arbitrary, and against the NDPS Act itself. According to him, this rule has very serious practical consequences in drug cases.
He pointed out that in his own matter involving Ayurvedic medicines, the chemical test showed that the actual opium content was only 74 grams. But because the total mixture weighed over 3.2 kilograms, the authorities classified it as a “commercial quantity.”
This exposed him to harsher punishment and stricter bail restrictions under Section 37 of the NDPS Act.
The petitioner further argued that the NDPS Act only talks about the actual drug content and not the total mixture. He relied on the definitions in the Act which clearly use percentage content for narcotics like opium and coca derivatives.
He also said that when Parliament amended the Act in 2001 to bring graded punishments depending on the quantity, the clear purpose was to give leniency to small drug users and punish traffickers more harshly.
In support, the petitioner cited the 2008 judgment in E. Michael Raj v. Narcotic Control Bureau. In that case, a two-judge bench had held that only the actual drug content in a mixture should be counted for classification.
However, that view was overruled by the 2020 decision in Hira Singh, where the Supreme Court upheld the government’s rule that the entire mixture weight should be taken into account.
The plea has strongly requested the Court to reconsider Hira Singh, pointing out that this approach leads to absurd and unfair results.
For example, a few grams of opium mixed with a large quantity of sugar would be treated as a “commercial quantity,” which carries a punishment of 10 to 20 years in jail. At the same time, pure opium of higher weight could attract a lesser punishment.
The petitioner also highlighted that the 2020 ruling failed to recognize that neutral substances may be added to drugs for very different reasons. In some cases, they are added as a diluent to make the drug consumable.
ALSO READ: ‘Mumbai At Standstill’: Bombay High Court Slams Manoj Jarange Over Maratha Quota Protest
In others, they may be carriers or even part of genuine products like Ayurvedic medicines. Treating all such mixtures in the same way, according to him, is a violation of Article 14 (right to equality) and Article 21 (right to life and personal liberty) of the Constitution.
The Supreme Court has now sought responses from the Central government and the Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) on this issue. The Bench has clearly indicated that the interpretation given in Hira Singh will have to be reconsidered in detail.
Case Title:
Mayank Girishbhai Shah vs. Union of India,
Read Order:
Click Here to Read Previous Reports on NDPS Act
