The Supreme Court quashed proceedings against former IPS officer Bharti Arora under the NDPS Act, criticizing a special judge’s predetermined conduct and irregular case handling. The court emphasized violations of natural justice, noted that adverse actions lacked proper notice to Arora, and ruled the case should have been conducted by a magistrate.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday provided relief to former IPS officer Bharti Arora by quashing proceedings against her under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act. The apex court criticized the conduct of the special judge involved, calling it “predetermined” and a “total non-application of mind.”
The bench, comprising Justices B.R. Gavai, P.K. Mishra, and K.V. Viswanathan, noted irregularities in the handling of the case.
“When we opened the sealed cover on October 24, 2024, and perused the order dated May 30, 2008, it became clear to us that the special judge had acted in a predetermined manner,”
the court observed.
The case dates back to 2007 when a man apprehended with over 8 kg of opium alleged that the substance was planted by others. Bharti Arora, then Superintendent of Police, Kurukshetra, conducted an inquiry that exonerated the accused and implicated three others. However, the special judge in February 2007 found the man guilty and acquitted the trio, alleging police officials had concocted a story.
The judge subsequently issued a show-cause notice to Arora under Section 58 of the NDPS Act, which penalizes vexatious actions by law enforcement. Despite being transferred, the judge dictated and typed an order on May 30, 2008, and placed it in a sealed cover for his successor to pronounce. The Supreme Court highlighted that such actions violated natural justice. “The special judge gave a complete go-bye to all the principles of natural justice,” it said.
The Punjab and Haryana High Court upheld the special judge’s actions in 2010, but the Supreme Court stayed its operation. The apex court ruled that the case should have been handled by a magistrate, as the maximum sentence under Section 58 is two years.
Further, the bench referenced Section 69 of the NDPS Act, which protects actions taken in good faith, emphasizing that no notice was given to Arora before adverse observations were made against her. “The special judge… made adverse observations against her by almost finding her guilty,” the court stated.
Read Also: Akhilesh Yadav After Supreme Court Direction: “Those Looking For Temples Under Mosques Don’t Want Peace”
In a definitive conclusion, the Supreme Court quashed all proceedings, including the special judge’s dictated order.
“The notice issued by the special judge dated February 26, 2007, to the appellant under Section 58 of the NDPS Act and all subsequent proceedings… shall stand quashed and set aside,”
the bench declared, allowing Arora’s appeal.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE