Calcutta HC Slams Judicial Officers For Legal Aid Failure In NDPS Case, Grants Bail To Accused

Narcotics case

The Calcutta High Court has issued a scathing order against 2 judicial officers for failing to provide legal representation to an accused in a narcotics case.

Justice Krishna Rao directed disciplinary action against the Chief Judicial Magistrate and the District & Sessions Judge of Alipurduar for their serious lapse in not offering legal aid to the accused Sudhar Mangar during critical court proceedings.

The court emphasized this failure as a grave violation of constitutional protections afforded to every arrested person.

Bail Granted Amidst Procedural Irregularities

While granting bail to Mangar, who was arrested on March 28, 2024, in an alleged cough syrup seizure case, the court identified multiple procedural violations.

The arrest memo notably lacked any mention of the grounds for arrest, despite constitutional and statutory requirements.

Justice Rao observed, “The Arresting Officer has violated Article 22(1) of the Constitution and Section 52(1) of the NDPS Act by not informing the grounds of arrest,” underscoring how this fundamental right was completely overlooked.

Complete Breakdown Of Legal Safeguards

The judgment detailed how the judicial system failed at multiple levels, from the initial arrest to remand proceedings. Neither the arresting officer nor the judicial officers ensured the accused understood why he was being detained.

The court rejected the prosecution’s argument that verbal explanation sufficed, noting the complete absence of evidence that any explanation was actually provided. This systemic failure left the accused completely vulnerable throughout the legal process.

Mandate For Disciplinary Action

In a rare move, the court ordered the Registrar General to place the matter before the Chief Justice for appropriate disciplinary measures against the erring officers.

The directive serves as a stern reminder about the non-negotiable duty of judicial officers to protect fundamental rights, particularly in stringent bail cases under the NDPS Act where accused persons are most vulnerable.

Landmark Reaffirmation Of Rights

This judgment stands as a significant reinforcement of constitutional protections in criminal proceedings. By granting bail while condemning the rights violations, the court has sent a clear message about the judiciary’s role as the guardian of fundamental rights. The order emphasizes that procedural safeguards like legal aid and arrest transparency cannot be sacrificed, even in cases involving serious offenses.

With bail granted, the focus now shifts to the disciplinary proceedings against the concerned officers.

The High Court’s intervention establishes an important precedent that will likely lead to greater scrutiny of arrest and remand procedures across lower courts, particularly in NDPS cases where rights violations are frequently reported.