A complex legislative framework for drug and substance control, the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (NDPS) encompasses a wide range of provisions. The Indian government passed a law outlining the rules, punishments, and processes for the illicit manufacture, sale, and transportation of narcotics. The legislation establishes strict penalties for drug offenders and divides narcotics into several classes. The complex web of drug trafficking networks, global boundaries, and shifting attitudes toward substance misuse all work against its effective enforcement. Striking a balance between rehabilitation and law enforcement is an ongoing problem. Navigating the intricacies of the law, the effects on society, and the dynamic nature of the drug trade are all necessary for comprehending its complexity.

The primary objective of the 1985 NDPS Act is to combat the pervasive problem of drug misuse and trafficking in India. Although the Act has good intentions, it is riddled with severe provisions that frequently result in the arbitrary prosecution of individuals, particularly young people who may not fully grasp the consequences of their actions.

As a seasoned lawyer dedicated to upholding Justice and defending the rights of individuals, I recently had the privilege of representing a teenager whose life was unjustly entangled in a drug consumption case. I want to share my experience and shed light on the complexities surrounding drug-related cases in India, particularly in the context of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act. For many years, I have represented clients in NDPS cases in the High Court and the Supreme Court. But some cases seem like a landmark and major milestones in my legal career. The case I’m highlighting right now stood out to me because it involved the careers of youngsters, which is a very serious matter. When it comes to making smart and correct choices, age plays a significant role. Teens who aren't yet old enough to fully grasp the nuances of the laws that govern their activities often cross lines that they would never cross if they were older and wiser. 

Basit was a teenager when he was arrested and charges of consumption and conspiracy were levelled against him. A young boy with dreams in his mind and a case on his track record that would kill all his life plans was my client. When he approached me with his case, the Chargesheet in this case was not filed. So based on the FIR, I filed a writ petition for quashing the case. With a mention of a few points regarding how he was falsely implicated in the case, I also positioned him as a victim and not a criminal. The moment the writ petition was filed, the respondent immediately filed the Chargesheet to make matters worse. That is because It is difficult to quash a case after filing of the charge sheet. But regardless of that, I continued with my plan of action and argued vehemently. I was not just focussing on winning the case but I felt majorly responsible in helping a young boy build his career and not give up his whole life to a criminal case that had become his label. 

I pointed out several discrepancies from the chargesheet regarding the fact that there were charges of consumption against him, and how his blood samples were taken, but the report was not annexed to the charge sheet to corroborate the alleged charge. His urine samples were taken and those were also not annexed in the chargesheet to corroborate the allegation. Also, the fact that the FSL report of the contraband was not filed to corroborate whether the contraband was mephedrone. 

As allegedly twelve-gram mephedrone was seized from his brother, I professed that it was a clear case of false implication where he was being implicated because he is related. He has been roped into the case because his brother was found with a 12-gram MD and  how charges of conspiracy were not even made out because there had to be some prior meeting of minds that had to come on record which was not the case. 

I also raised this submission on how the investigating agency had filed a Chargesheet after a delay of almost 20 months, exactly the moment we filed the petition. On the contrary, they were just taking things lightly and did not seem to be interested in filing the Chargesheet. Basit wanted to travel to San Francisco for further studies but this case had become an impediment for his future and career. I put forth my concern about how his career and his future could be jeopardized because of this pending case against him. So taking into consideration all of these submissions, the case got quashed. To get an NDPS Case Quashed is a very rare phenomenon in the legal world.

Aryan Khan's Drugs Cruise case that was getting a lot of spotlight was another milestone in my professional life, where I defended the accused Avin Sahu. Even in this case, Charges of conspiracy were levelled against every accused. My client was one of them. There were about 20 accused in the case. It became all the more difficult for any accused to get bail due to the nature, importance, and charges in the case. After Aryan's bail was rejected, I was arguing for my client’s bail the very next day.  I could clearly see one career collapsing, one young boy being labelled and that gave me the strength to put all my efforts into figuring out the possibilities and realities of the situation. I argued that the youth will become hardened criminals if we do not view them with compassion rather than putting them behind bars in the company of hardcore criminals. I raised a question as to why Blood samples were not taken and there was nothing on record to establish the prior meeting of minds of the accused to hatch a conspiracy.  

I managed to save one young boy and secured bail for him which unchained the chain of conspiracy which further diluted the serious charge of Conspiracy which ultimately helped the other accused in the Drugs Cruise case. 

Irrespective of their knowledge or intent, individuals who are found in possession of narcotics are subject to strict liability under Section 37 of the NDPS Act. This provision has the potential to unintentionally ensnare individuals who are not guilty of possessing illegal substances or are oblivious of their nature. Consequently, numerous adolescents and young adults become entangled in a legal dilemma, confronted with grave repercussions for behaviours they may not entirely grasp.

As a society, we must immediately begin educating our youth about the NDPS Act and the severe consequences that may result from drug-related offences. The integration of legal literacy initiatives with prevention and awareness programmes has the potential to enable youth to make well-informed choices and evade the dangers associated with substance misuse and trafficking.

Aside from that, the legal system must ensure that justice is administered impartially and fairly, with due consideration to the particulars of each case. The case involving my client serves as a poignant illustration of the criticality of due process and the necessity for capable legal counsel to protect the accused's rights.

I am dedicated to promoting justice and equality for all individuals, irrespective of their origin or circumstances, in my capacity as a Prominent attorney. The Adolescent's Drug Consumption and Conspiracy case was Quashed, which served to reassert my conviction in the legal system's ability to rectify wrongdoing and restore public confidence.

We must approach the ongoing struggle against substance abuse and trafficking with compassion, understanding, and dedication to justice. Our collective efforts can foster a safer and more equitable society using increasing awareness, advancing legal literacy, and guaranteeing fair legal proceedings. With such unique and challenging cases, I have been able to carve my niche into the world of justice and law. I have immense gratitude towards the Judiciary  that has a balanced approach towards dispensing justice in these sensitive Narcotics cases.

The Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) stands as a cornerstone in the legal arsenal of many nations, aimed at combating terrorism and safeguarding national security. Enacted with the intent of thwarting unlawful activities and disrupting the networks that propagate them, the UAPA empowers law enforcement agencies with robust mechanisms to investigate, prevent, and prosecute acts deemed detrimental to the sovereignty and integrity of the nation. Since its inception, the act has undergone several amendments, reflecting evolving threats and judicial interpretations, making it a subject of intense scrutiny and debate within legal, political, and human rights circles. This introduction provides a glimpse into the multifaceted nature of the UAPA, delving into its origins, provisions, controversies, and implications for civil liberties and national security.

Notable characteristics of the UAPA:

Unlawful actions, as defined by the Act, refer to any deliberate action undertaken by an individual or group to undermine the territorial integrity and sovereignty of India. It includes verbal communication, written expression, or behaviours that endorse the act of seceding or ceding any portion of India.

Terrorist Activities: The UAPA offers a comprehensive definition of terrorism, encompassing actions that pose a threat to India's unity, integrity, security, or sovereignty, and aim to instill fear in the population or specific groups within India or any foreign nation. It includes actions of aggression, vandalism, and utilisation of firearms or explosives.

The 2019 amendment to the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) marked a significant turning point in India's legislative approach to counterterrorism and national security. Introduced with the aim of enhancing the effectiveness of law enforcement agencies in combating terrorism, the amendment expanded the scope of the UAPA by empowering the government to designate individuals as "terrorists" based on certain criteria. This amendment also granted authorities the authority to seize properties owned by suspected terrorists, further bolstering the state's ability to disrupt terrorist financing networks. However, critics raised concerns about the potential for misuse of these expanded powers, particularly in terms of infringing upon civil liberties and fundamental rights. The 2019 amendment to the UAPA thus represents a contentious and complex intersection between the imperatives of national security and the protection of individual freedoms in a democratic society.

The Act confers broad investigative powers onto the National Investigation Agency (NIA) to probe and bring legal action against offences under UAPA. It permits searches and arrests without the need for a warrant, based on suspicion of being involved in actions related to terrorism.

Under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), bail procedures are quite stringent due to the seriousness of the offenses covered. Additionally, the burden of proof often rests heavily on the defendant to demonstrate why bail should be granted, and the courts tend to prioritize national security concerns when evaluating bail applications under UAPA.

Bail- Restrictions In Section 43­D (5) of UAPA Act Are Stringent:

In the aftermath of the Bombay terror attacks, the Union government enacted the UAPA Amendment Act, 2008. The Amendment introduced Section 43D (5), which required a Court to deny bail if there were reasonable grounds to believe that the case against the accused was prima facie true. The provision made bail difficult to secure, since it required the Court to assess guilt only by looking at the charge sheet prepared by the National Investigation Agency (NIA). The accused cannot provide any evidence outside the chargesheet in their defense. 

Special Courts: The legislation allows for the creation of specialised judicial bodies that have the authority to hold closed-door trials and handle evidence in a manner that preserves the anonymity of witnesses and protects sensitive information.

Disputes and Evaluations:

Issues related to the protection and promotion of human rights:Critics contend that the UAPA's expansive definitions and rigorous provisions have the potential to be abused by authorities, leading to infringements on human rights and civil freedoms. The prolonged incarceration without formal charges and the challenges in securing release on bond have been sources of disagreement.

Political Misuse: There are apprehensions that the UAPA can be exploited to target political adversaries, activists, and journalists by falsely claiming to prevent terrorism, thus suppressing opposition and curbing freedom of speech.

Judicial Scrutiny: Although the courts have validated the Act, there have been demands for increased judicial supervision to prevent misuse and guarantee the protection of the accused's rights.

Navigating the Legal Maze: My Journey in Handling a UAPA Case

Recently, I secured Bail for my Client Vaibhav Raut who was arrested in Nalasopara Arms Hauls case as the Pßrime accused on charges of being a member of Right wing group Sanatan Sanstha and plotting an attack on the Sunburn Festival with crude bombs. Vaibhav Raut was arrested on August 9, 2018, after the Maharashtra Anti Terrorism Squad seized a significant amount of ammunition, including country-made pistols and crude bombs from his home in Mumbai’s Nalasopara locality.

I read the entire chargesheet filed against my Client Vaibhav Raut. According to the prosecution, Vaibhav Raut is a part of a conspiracy to destabilize India and destroy the sovereignty and integrity of India by indulging in some terrorist activity. Raut is allegedly said to be an active member of an organization (Sanatan Sanstha) of which the other co-accused are also alleged to be members. The object of this organization is stated to form a ‘Hindu Rashtra’, by secretly forming a terrorist gang within the State of Maharashtra and adjoining states. It is further alleged by the prosecution that in order to achieve the said object of the Sanatan Sanstha, Raut prepared crude bombs and stored explosives in his house and in the godown. It is further alleged that Raut also conducted recce of the places where the bombs were to be planted. It is further alleged that one of the aims of the members of the Sanatan Sanstha was to prevent screening of movies, holding of western cultural programmes and organisation of such events, such as the ‘Sunburn’ festival in Pune and other events, which according to Sanatan Sanstha are perceived to be against the tenets of Hinduism, an ideology followed by the Sanatan Sanstha.

I argued before the Bombay High Court that although, there is recovery of 8 crude bombs from the house of Raut, the said house does not stand in the name of Vaibhav Raut, nor are the bombs recovered under section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act. I further argued that even the godown from where 12 crude bombs are recovered, does not stand in the name of Raut but stands in the name of Om Sai Developers and that here is no documents on record to show that Raut had purchased the said godown.  Moreover, the alleged Bomb were seized prior to the arrest of my Client. I submitted that the alleged diary which is in the handwriting of Raut was recovered from the garage, However, the contents therein, have not been corroborated by any witness. I further asserted that the godown from which the crude bombs were retrieved belonged to a different owner and not my client. the said recovery from the godown is also not under section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, but, was effected prior to the arrest of Vaibhav Raut.

I emphasized that the presence of statutory restrictions like Section 43-D(5) of UAPA per-se does not oust the ability of Constitutional Courts to grant bail on grounds of violation of Part III of the Constitution. Indeed, both the restrictions under a Statue as well as the powers exercisable under Constitutional Jurisdiction can be well harmonised. Whereas at commencement of proceedings, Courts are expected to appreciate the legislative policy against grant of bail but the rigours of such provisions will melt down where there is no likelihood of trial being completed within a reasonable time and the period of incarceration already undergone has exceeded a substantial part of the prescribed sentence. Such an approach would safeguard against the possibility of provisions like Section 43-D(5) of UAPA being used as the sole metric for denial of bail or for wholesale breach of constitutional right to speedy trial.

Resultantly, Bombay High Court granted Bail to Vaibhav Raut on September 20, 2023.

Thorough research and a deep understanding of the intricacies of the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) was pivotal in helping me secure bail for my client facing charges under this stringent law. The UAPA is known for its stringent provisions, including provisions regarding bail, which require a meticulous understanding of both the legal framework and the specific circumstances of the case. I embarked on a comprehensive examination of the UAPA, dissecting its provisions and legal precedents to identify any potential avenues for bail within its constraints. This involved scrutinizing the specific charges levelled against my client, analysing the evidence presented by the prosecution and evaluating the constitutional validity of the detention. Additionally, I delved into my client’s background, personal circumstances, and any mitigating factors that could support my Bail application. By leveraging my expertise and conducting exhaustive research, I crafted a compelling argument that addressed the concerns of the court while advocating for my client’s right to liberty.

Moreover, a lawyer proficient in navigating the complexities of the UAPA can effectively challenge any overly broad or vague provisions ensuring that the rights of the accused are safeguarded throughout the legal process. Ultimately, it is this combination of thorough research, nuanced understanding of the law and strategic advocacy led to success in securing bail for my client Vaibhav Raut facing charges under the UAPA, providing him with the opportunity to await trial outside of custody.