THE NARCOTIC DRUGS AND PSYCHOTROPIC

SUBSTANCES ACT, 1985

 TABLE OF CONTENTS

CONTENTS PAGE NO.

INTRODUCTION 1
HISTORY AND OBJECTIVES 1
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS 2
AMENDMENTS 5
KEY SECTIONS AND JUDICIAL PRECEDENTS 5
➢ PUNISHMENTS UNDER THE ACT
➢ PROVISION FOR BAIL (SECTION 37)
➢ PRESUMPTION OF CULPABILITY (SECTION 35)
➢ MANDATORY COMPLIANCE OF SEARCH PROCEDURES
(SECTION 50)
➢ INADMISSIBILITY OF CONFESSIONS (SECTION 67)
SHORTCOMINGS 11
CONCLUSION 11
BIBLIOGRAPHY 13
 1

INTRODUCTION

Just like a coin has two sides, drugs also have both positive and negative aspects. The use of
drugs and psychotropic substances can be traced back to ancient times, serving both beneficial
and harmful purposes.

On the positive side, the use of drugs for medical and scientific purposes is one of their greatest
benefits. For instance, antibiotics, painkillers and vaccines are necessary drugs for treating
various ailments and relieving pain. Psychotropic substances found in anti-depressants play a
vital role in mental health treatment. Moreover, drugs significantly contribute to scientific
advancements. They are extensively studied to develop cures for life-threatening diseases such
as cancer and HIV. Psychotropic substances are being researched for their potential to treat
mental health conditions, have become an emerging global concern.

However, the negative impacts of drugs cannot be ignored. The misuse of drugs poses serious
health risks including addiction, organ damage, mental health disorders, etc. Drugs also present
a threat to society, often leading to an increase in crime and violence. Under the influence of
drugs, individuals can lose control of their actions, resulting in heinous crimes. Once someone
becomes addicted, their capacity for rational thinking diminishes. This not only affects their
productivity but also leads to personal issues such as financial instability and strained
relationships. Drugs also have a damaging impact on mental health, often leading to depression,
anxiety and hallucinations. For many addicts, it becomes difficult to return to reality and
function as a normal, healthy individual.

In order to combat the adverse effects of drug abuse, the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic
Substances Act, commonly known as the NDPS Act was passed by the Parliament in 1985.

HISTORY AND OBJECTIVES

Until the passing of the NDPS Act in 1985, there were no laws regulate or control the misuse
of drugs. The Atharva Veda mentions smoking of cannabis. Cannabis was widely used for
recreational purposes, a practice that socially acceptable in India. Despite the harmful effects
of cannabis and its derivatives like bhang and marijuana, they were legally sold until the NDPS
Act came into force.1

1
Sarthak Awasthi, ‘A detailed overview of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances act, 1985’ [2022]
<https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/readersblog/legalangle/a-detailed-overview-of-narcotic-drugs-and-
psychotropic-substances-act1985-45878/> accessed 10 October 2024.
 2

India is a signatory to the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961, the Convention on
Psychotropic Substances, 1971 and the Convention against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and
Psychotropic Substances, 1988. These Conventions recommend measures to restrict the use of
narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances for medical and scientific purposes while
preventing their abuse.2

Article 47 of Indian Constitution mandates the state to raise the level of nutrition and the
standard of living and to increase public health, which can be achieved by limiting the
consumption of intoxicating drinks and drugs which have adverse effects on health.3 Article
253 empowers the Parliament to enact laws to adhere to the international conventions and
treaties. Article 47 along with the need to comply with international conventions, led to the
enactment of the NDPS Act.4

The NDPS Act provides stringent provisions for the regulation of three classes of substances,
i.e., narcotic drugs, psychotropic substances, and chemicals associated with them. It prohibits
activities related to the manufacture, cultivation, possession, sale, purchase, trade, storage,
transport and consumption of drugs. The Preamble of the Act suggests its primary objective is
to control these operations and to prevent illicit trafficking. It further indicates the intent to
forfeit properties acquired through illegal drug trade and to ensure compliance with the
International Conventions on Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances, to which India is a
signatory.5

LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS

Chapter I (sections 1-3) of the NDPS Act contains preliminary provisions. Section 2 defines
certain key terms frequently used in the Act. According to section 2(xiv), “narcotic drugs”
mean coca leaf, cannabis (hemp), opium, poppy straw, and all manufactured drugs. Section
2(xxiii) defines “psychotropic substances” as any substance, whether natural or synthetic, or
any natural material or any salt or preparation of such substances or materials which are
mentioned in the Schedule of “List of Psychotropic Substances”. According to Section 2 (via)

2
Ibid.
3
Sumedha Chatterjee, ‘Drug Policy of India with Special Emphasis on NDPS Act, 1985’ [2024] 4(3) IJLLR
<https://articles.manupatra.com/article-details/DRUG-POLICY-OF-INDIA-WITH-SPECIAL-EMPHASIS-ON-
NDPS-ACT-1985> accessed 10 October 2024.
4
Stuti Dave, ‘Critical Analysis and Assessment of NDPS Act and Trafficking from an Indian Legislation
Perspective’ [2024] 5(2) IJLLR <https://articles.manupatra.com/article-details/CRITICAL-ANALYSIS-AND-
ASSESSMENT-OF-NDPS-ACT-AND-TRAFFICKING-FROM-AN-INDIAN-LEGISLATION-
PERSPECTIVE> accessed 10 October 2024.
5
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.
 3

and Section 2 (xxiiia) of the NDPS Act, commercial quantity means any quantity exceeding
the limit specified by the Central Government, while small quantity refers to any quantity
below the specified limit, as determined by the Central Government.6

Chapter II (sections 4-7) outlines the authorities and officers responsible for enforcing the
provisions of the Act and complying with the regulations laid down in the Act in relation to
narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances. Section 4 mandates the Central Government to
prevent and combat drug abuse, ensuring that narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances are
used only for medical and scientific purposes. Sections 5 and 7 empower the Central and State
Governments to appoint officers to enforce the Act. Section 5 authorises the Central
Government to appoint a Narcotics Commissioner. Section 6 provides for the establishment of
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Consultative Committee, an advisory body.
Chapter IIA (sections 7A and 7B) provides for the creation of a National Fund for Control of
Drug Abuse. U/s 7A, the fund is to be used for preventing drug misuse, identifying and treating
addicts, combating illicit drug trafficking, educating the public ensuring the supply of
necessary drugs and other crucial activities. Section 7B requires the Central Government to
publish an annual report along with a statement of accounts at the end of each financial year
stating the activities financed u/s 7A.7

Chapter III (sections 8-14) highlights the activities that are prohibited, controlled and
regulated under the Act. Section 8 is an important provision that prohibits certain operations
by individuals including:

1. Cultivation or gathering of coca plant,

2. Cultivation of opium poppy or any cannabis plant,
3. Production, manufacture, possession, sale, purchase, transportation, storage, import and
export of any narcotic drug or psychotropic substances.

However, this prohibition does not apply when such activities are essential for medical or
scientific purposes, or for the export of poppy plants for decorative use.8

Sections 9 and 10 empower the Central Government and State Governments respectively to
regulate and control various activities related to narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances
such as granting permission for cultivation of coca plants and opium poppy and their import

6
Ibid, s. 2.
7
NDPS Act, (n. 5).
8
Ibid.
 4

and export, production and sale of opium, laying down rules for issuing licenses, determining
prices, checking quality, etc. Section 12 prohibits the external trade in narcotic drugs and
psychotropic substances without prior permission from the Central Government.9

Chapter IV (sections 15-40) specifies the offences and associated punishments associated
under the Act. A wide range of activities related to narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances
such as production, manufacture, cultivation, sale, purchase, storage, transport, trade, use,
consumption, etc. are penalised. These offences are considered to be serious and punishable
with strict penalties. The severity of the punishment depends on the nature and most
importantly the quantity of the drugs involved. Section 37 classifies these offences as
cognizable and non-bailable and section 36 mandates the constitution of special courts for trial
of these offences.10

Chapter V (sections 41-68) outlines the procedures to be followed by police and other officers
for offences related to narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances. It empowers them to
conduct mandatory searches and seizures and arrest individuals involved in drug-related
activities, sometimes without a warrant. This chapter also safeguards the rights of the accused,
such as u/s 50 where a personal search must be conducted in the presence of a gazetted officer
or magistrate. It deals in detail about the process for handling arrested individuals and seized
drugs. Additionally, chapter VA (sections 68A-68Z) introduced by the 1989 amendment.
contains provisions for tracing, seizing and forfeiting properties acquired from drug-related
offences. The aim of is to prohibit the criminals from benefitting from such illegally acquired
properties.11

Lastly, chapter VI (sections 69-83) contains miscellaneous provisions addressing matters not
covered in previous chapters. It provides protection for officers acting in good faith from
penalties, lays guidelines for Central and State Government to frame rules and regulations,
imposes a duty to comply with international conventions and covers jurisdictional matters.
Section 71 is particularly important as it concerns taking suitable measures for treatment and
rehabilitation of drug addicts. 12

9
Ibid.
10
Stuti (n. 4).
11
NDPS Act, (n. 5).
12
Ibid.
 5

AMENDMENTS

The NDPS Act was introduced in 1985 and has been amended four times till date.

1. 1989 Amendment: This amendment led to the insertion of stricter provisions. Section
27A was added and Chapter VA were added, Death penalty was introduced for habitual
offenders in severe drug cases. Section 36 was also added for the establishment of
special courts to ensure speedy trial of drug cases.
2. 2001 Amendment: This amendment categorized penalties for offences based on the
quantity od drugs or narcotic substances involved in. U/s 37 certain relaxations were
introduced for granting bail.
3. 2014 Amendment: This amendment added clause (viiia) in section 2 which defines
“essential narcotic drug”. Prior to this amendment, the strictness of NDPS Act made it
difficult to acquire narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances for scientific and
medical purposes, but the amendment made the access easier. It also enhanced the
maximum punishment for offences involving small quantities of drugs from 6 months
to 1 year.
4. 2021 Amendment: This amendment aimed to rectify drafting errors made in the 2014
amendment. The 2014 amendment omitted the necessary change in section 27A. The
2021 amendment corrected this by referencing section 2(viiib) was mentioned in
section 27A.13

KEY SECTIONS AND JUDICIAL PRECEDENTS

The NDPS Act is comprehensive in nature comprising of 83 sections that cover various aspects
of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances. Under this heading, only a few essential
provisions along with relevant case laws will be discussed.

PUNISHMENTS UNDER THE ACT

Chapter IV provides penalties for offences related to narcotic drugs and psychotropic
substances. Illegal activities such as production, manufacture, cultivation, sale, purchase,
storage, transport, trade, use and consumption are penalised.

13
Nikunj Arora, ‘NDPS Act: Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985’ [2022]
<https://blog.ipleaders.in/ndps-act-narcotic-drugs-and-psychotropic-substances-act-
1985/#Punishment_under_the_NDPS_Act> accessed 10 October 2024.
 6

Sections 15, 17, 21 and 22 prescribe punishments for unlawful activities related to poppy
straw, prepared opium, manufactured drugs and psychotropic substances respectively. Section
20 makes the cultivation of cannabis plant punishable with rigorous imprisonment for a
maximum of 10 years and fine up to Rs. 1 lakh. It also provides penalties for the production,
manufacture, sale, purchase, possession, trade and use of cannabis which follow the same
framework as the preceding sections. Section 23 prescribes punishment for illegal imports,
exports or transhipments of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances in India.14

The penalties under these sections are categorized based on the quantity involved as follows:

a) Small quantity: Rigorous imprisonment up to 1 year, or fine up to Rs. 10,000 or both,

b) Between small quantity and commercial quantity: Rigorous imprisonment up to 10
years and fine up to Rs. 1 lakh.
c) Commercial quantity: Rigorous imprisonment for at least 10 years extendable up to 20
years and a fine of at least Rs.1 lakh extendable to Rs. 2 lakhs. (With sufficient reasons
stated in the judgement, the Court can impose a fine greater than Rs. 2 lakhs.)15

Section 16 makes illegal activities related to coca plants and leaves punishable with rigorous
imprisonment up to 10 years and fine up to Rs. 1 lakh.16

Section 18 provides punishment for illegal activities related to opium poppy and opium. The
penalties for small quantity and commercial quantity are the same as those in section 15, but it
additionally states that in any other case, the punishment includes rigorous imprisonment up to
10 years and fine up to Rs. 1 lakh.17

Section 19 punishes cultivators who are licensed by the Central Government to cultivate opium
poppy but embezzle or illegally dispose of the opium produced. The punishment includes
rigorous imprisonment for at least 10 years but can be extended up to 20 years and fine up to
Rs. 1 lakh extendable to Rs. 2 lakhs. With sufficient reasons stated in the judgement, the Court
can impose a fine greater than Rs. 2 lakhs.18

Section 24 provides punishment for individuals who trade narcotic drugs or psychotropic
substances outside India without prior authorisation from the Central Government. The

14
NDPS Act (n. 5), ss. 15, 17, 20, 21, 22 and 23.
15
Ibid.
16
NDPS Act (n. 5), s. 16.
17
NDPS Act (n. 5), s. 18.
18
NDPS Act (n. 5), s. 19.
 7

punishment includes rigorous imprisonment for at least 10 years extendable up to 20 years and
fine of at least Rs. 1 lakh extendable up to Rs. 2 lakhs. (Fine greater than Rs. 2 lakhs can be
imposed with sufficient reasons stated in the judgement.)19

Section 27 provides punishment for consumption of any narcotic drug or psychotropic

substance by an individual.

a) For consumption of cocaine, morphine, diacetylmorphine or any other narcotic drug or

any psychotropic substance specified by the Central Government, the punishment
involves rigorous imprisonment up to 1 year or fine up to Rs. 20,000 or both.
b) Any other narcotic drug or psychotropic substance apart from those mentioned in clause
(a), the punishment involves imprisonment up to 6 months or fine up to Rs. 10,000 or
both.20

Section 27A punishes individuals involved in financing illicit trafficking of narcotic drugs and
psychotropic substances or harbouring offenders. The punishment includes rigorous
imprisonment for at least 10 years extendable up to 20 years and fine of at least Rs. 1 lakh
extendable up to Rs. 2 lakhs. (Fine greater than Rs. 2 lakhs can be imposed with sufficient
reasons stated in the judgement.)21

Section 28 provides that a person who attempts to commit an offence will be subject to the
same punishment as if the offence was successfully committed. Section 29 states that the
individuals who abet, conspire or are involved in the commission of a crime will get the same
punishment as the principal offender. Section 32 states if no specific punishment is prescribed
for an offence under chapter IV of the Act, the offender will be punished with imprisonment
up to 6 months or fine or both.22

Section 31 provides enhanced punishment for habitual offenders. For a second and every
subsequent offence, the punishment includes rigorous imprisonment and fine both up to one
and a half times the maximum imprisonment or fine prescribed. If the minimum punishment
applies, it will also be enhanced by one and a half times. Courts may impose greater by stating
sufficient reasons. This section also applies to convictions made by competent foreign courts.23

19
NDPS Act (n. 5), s. 24.
20
NDPS Act (n. 5), s. 27.
21
NDPS Act (n. 5), s. 27A.
22
NDPS Act (n. 5), ss. 28, 29 and 32.
23
NDPS Act (n. 5), s. 31.
 8

Section 31A prescribes punishments for individuals previously convicted under sections 7, 19,
24, 27A or for offences involving commercial quantities of narcotic drugs or psychotropic
substances. If such person is convicted again for activities like production, trade, possession or
financing of these substances, the punishment will be no less than that provided u/s 31 or may
include death penalty. This section also applies to a person convicted by a competent foreign
court for these offences.24

PROVISION FOR BAIL (SECTION 37)

Section 37 of the NDPS Act classifies offences under Act as cognizable and lays down the
specific conditions for granting bail which differ from the provisions in the Code of Civil
Procedure, 1973, now replaced with Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. As per this
section, offences that violate sections 19, 24, 27A or those involving commercial quantities of
drugs are non-bailable.

For granting bail u/s 37, two conditions must be fulfilled:

1. An opportunity to oppose the bail application should be given to the public prosecutor.
2. After opposition by the public prosecutor, the Court must be convinced that there are
reasonable grounds to believe thar the accused is innocent and is not likely to commit
any offence if released on bail.25

In UOI v. Thamisharasi and others.26, the Supreme Court explained that the NDPS Act
imposes a stricter burden on the accused compared to the BNSS. Under the NDPS Act, the
accused must show reasonable grounds of his innocence u/s 37 in order to be granted bail.
Moreover, in Narcotics Control Bureau v. Krishan Lal and others27, the court held that
section 37 of the NDPS Act prevails over the bail provisions in BNSS, meaning that conditions
for bail under the NDPS Act are more stringent. In State of Kerela v. Rajesh28, it was clarified
that “reasonable grounds” u/s 37 means more than just prima facie grounds. There must be
strong evidence in favour of the accused’s claim of innocence. In case the court is not
sufficiently convinced, bail will be denied.29

24
NDPS Act (n. 5), s. 31A.
25
NDPS Act (n. 5), s. 37.
26
UOI v. Thamisharasi and others, 1995 (3) SCR 905.
27
Narcotics Control Bureau v. Krishan Lal and others, 1991 AIR 558.
28
State of Kerala v. Rajesh, SC 154 2020.
29
Arya Thakkar & Vedant Karia, ‘Bail under NDPS Act: Guilty until proven innocent?’ [2024] 5(2) IJLLR
<https://articles.manupatra.com/article-details/BAIL-UNDER-NDPS-ACT-GUILTY-UNTIL-PROVEN-
INNOCENT> accessed 10 October 2024.
 9

In the famous case of Aryan Shah Rukh Khan v. UOI30, the bail application was repeatedly
rejected because it did not fulfil one of the essential conditions for granting bail, i.e. there were
no reasonable grounds to believe that he was not guilty.

PRESUMPTION OF CULPABILITY (SECTION 35)

Section 35 contradicts the fundamental legal principle of “innocent until proven guilty” by
placing the burden of proof on the accused to prove his innocence. According to this section,
if a culpable mental state is required for prosecuting a person under this Act, the court will
presume the existence of such a mental state. However, the accused is allowed to defend
himself by proving that he did not possess such a mental state. U/s 35, a fact is considered to
be proved when the court is convinced of its existence beyond a reasonable doubt. Mere
preponderance of probability is insufficient.31

In the case of Madan Lal and v. State of Himachal Pradesh32, it was held that presumption
of guilt arises against the accused if he is found in conscious possession of drugs. The burden
then shifts to the accused who is responsible for proving that he was completely unaware of
such possession of drugs.

MANDATORY COMPLIANCE OF SEARCH PROCEDURES (SECTION 50)

Section 50 safeguards the rights of an individual by requiring that the officer conducting the
search must inform him about his right to be searched in the presence of a gazetted officer or
magistrate.33

In State of Punjab v. Balbir Singh34, it was held that strict compliance with section 50 is
necessary. Failure to inform the individual about his right to be searched in presence of a
magistrate or gazetted officer can invalidate the trial. In Joseph Fernandez v. State of Goa35,
it was held that substantial compliance with section 50 is enough. Even if the individual is
informed in an informal way, it will be still considered as valid intimation. In Prabha Shankar
Dubey v. State of Madhya Pradesh36, the court emphasized the importance of informing

30
Aryan Shah Rukh Khan v. UOI
31
NDPS Act (n. 5), s. 35.
32
Madan Lal v. State of Himachal Pradesh, (2003) 7 SCC 465.
33
NDPS Act (n. 5), s. 50.
34
State of Punjab v. Balbir Singh, 1994 SCC (3) 299.
35
Joseph Fernandez v. State of Goa, 1996 Cri LJ 822.
36
Prabha Shankar Dubey v. State of Madhya Pradesh, AIR 2004 SC 486.
 10

individuals of their rights and stated that if the individual fails to respond to the intimation, it
does not mean the officer did not follow the law.

However, due to the misinterpretation of Balbir Singh Case in the preceding two cases, the
main purpose of section 50 was undermined leading to trials based on substantial compliance.
This problem was solved in Vijaysinh Chandubha Jadeja v. State of Gujarat37 where the
court clarified that it is mandatory to inform the individual about his rights u/s 50 and this must
be done explicitly. The concept of substantial compliance was rejected. Furthermore, in Arif
Khan @ Agha Khan v. State of Uttarakhand38, the judgement in Jadeja case was upheld
reaffirming that failure to comply with section 50 can lead to acquittal of the accused.39

INADMISSIBILITY OF CONFESSIONS (SECTION 67)

Section 67 allows officers appointed u/s 53 to summon individuals for gathering information
and record their statements during investigations.40 Section 25 of the Indian Evidence Act,
1872, now section 23 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 states that any confession
made by an accused to a police officer cannot be used against the accused’s own interest. Until
the judgement in Tofan Singh v. State of Tamil Nadu41, the officer-in-charge under the NDPS
Act was not regarded to be police officer within the meaning of section 23 of the Bharatiya
Sakshya Adhiniyam. Therefore, confessions made to them by accused were admissible and
treated as substantive piece of evidence. This principle was upheld in the cases of Raj Kumar
Karwal v. UOI42 and Kanahiyalal v. UOI43.

However, after the judgement in Tofan Singh v. State of Tamil Nadu44, there was a significant
change. It was held that statements recorded u/s 67 of the NDPS Act cannot be treated as
confessions during trial of offences under the Act. Furthermore, it was established that officers
authorised u/s 53 are police officers and if the confessional statements made by the accused to
an officer u/s 53 are used for conviction, it would directly infringe the accused’s fundamental

37
Vijaysinh Chandubha Jadeja v. State of Gujarat, (2011) 1 SCC 609.
38
Arif Khan @ Agha Khan v. State of Uttarakhand, 2018 (6) SCALE 456.
39
Abhishek Gurawa, ‘The Question of Substantial Compliance of Section 50, Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic
Substances act, 1985’ [2021] 3(3) IJLSI <https://articles.manupatra.com/article-details/The-Question-of-
Substantial-Compliance-of-Section-50-Narcotics-Drugs-and-Psychotropic-Substances-act-1985> accessed 10
October 2024.
40
NDPS Act (n. 5), s. 67.
41
Tofan Singh v. State of Tamil Nadu, (2021) 4 SCC 1.
42
Raj Kumar Karwal v. UOI, 1990 SCR (2) 63.
43
Kanahiyalal v. UOI, 2008 AIR (SC) 1044.
44
Tofan (n. 41).
 11

rights, specifically Article 20(3) (right against self-incrimination) and Article 21 (right to
privacy) of the Constitution of India.45

SHORTCOMINGS

A few notable shortcomings in the NDPS Act are as follows:

1. The NDPS Act fails to distinguish between drug users and drug dealers, subjecting both
to similar punishments.
2. The Act also contradicts the fundamental legal principle of “innocent until proven
guilty” by presuming the accused to be guilty. The burden of proof lies on accused to
prove his innocence.
3. It does not differentiate between soft drugs and hard drugs resulting in identical
punishments for both.46
4. Instead of focusing on rehabilitation and aftercare for addicts, the Act emphasizes on
conviction and punishment.
5. While the Act aims to combat drug-related offences, it lacks provisions for public
education and awareness programs.
6. The Act creates ambiguities in certain areas. For instance, the question of whether
section 50 should be substantially complied with or strictly adhered to has been
determined in judicial precedents, establishing that strict compliance is mandatory.
7. The provision for bail u/s 37 is stringent for certain offences, even if they involve small
quantities of drugs.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, the NDPS Act is a crucial legislation that plays a vital role in combating the drug
related issues in India. Its primary intention is to curb the menace associated with illegal drug
activities. However, its effectiveness relies entirely on proper implementation.

In most cases, only downtrodden individuals face penalties, while the actual masterminds of
the crimes remain uncaught. To truly address the drug menace, authorities should investigate

45
Wasim Beg and Swarnendu Chatterjee, ‘Turning a New Leaf: Inadmissibility of the Confessional Statements
under Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985’ [2021] BLJ
<https://articles.manupatra.com/article-details/Turning-a-New-Leaf-Inadmissibility-of-the-Confessional-
Statements-under-Narcotic-Drugs-and-Psychotropic-Substances-Act-1985> accessed 10 October 2024.
46
K. Ramakanth Reddy, ‘Understanding the Narcotics Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985’ [2018]
<https://articles.manupatra.com/article-details/Understanding-The-Narcotics-Drugs-And-Psychotropic-
Substances-Act-1985> accessed 10 October 2024.
 12

root causes of the cases and punish the serious offenders rather than only targeting the poor. It
is also important to ensure that innocent individuals are not punished.

Despite certain minor loopholes, the NDPS Act is stringent enough to prevent the drug-related
offences. To enhance its efficiency and effectiveness, several changes can be implemented.
Firstly, a clear distinction should be made between drug users and dealers allowing for
rehabilitation and proper aftercare for users while imposing severe punishments on dealers.
The Act should prioritize rehabilitation and treatment for offenders to help them lead normal
lives, rather than focusing solely on imposing harsh penalties. Additionally, organising public
educational and awareness programs can help curb the drug menace and protect innocent
individuals. Since the Act presumes the accused to be guilty, ensuring adequate legal
representation and appeal provisions is necessary to prevent wrongful convictions. By
implementing these changes, the Act will become a more comprehensive tool in the fight
against drug-related offences.

Ultimately, the successful enforcement of the Act depends on the diligent execution of duties
by the officers and authorities, along with their cooperation with lawmakers.
 13

BIBLIOGRAPHY

LEGISLATIVE TEXTS

• The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

LEGAL DATABASES

• Manupatra
• SCC Online

WEBSITES

• blog.ipleaders.in
• www.timesofindia.com