Court finds no malafide intent or fundamental rights violation in narcotics case, denies compensation claim.
In a significant ruling, the Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court, presided over by Justice Shahzad Azeem, dismissed a petition seeking the quashment of an FIR and compensation of Rs. 50 lakhs per petitioner in a case involving allegations of illegal narcotics trafficking and money laundering under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act).
The case, titled Javid Ahmad Lone and others v. Union Territory of J&K, revolved around FIR No. 11/2023, registered at Karnah Police Station based on reliable source information regarding the clandestine involvement of the petitioners in smuggling narcotics and laundering the proceeds. Despite rigorous investigation, including the seizure of vehicles and mobile phones, the case was closed as "not admitted" due to insufficient evidence to file a charge sheet.
The petitioners contended that the FIR was vague and based on a concocted narrative, with no contraband recovery made. They further alleged malafide intent, pointing out that one of the accused had been in jail since 2018. However, the court found no basis for these claims, noting the investigation's adherence to due process and absence of harassment or arrest of the petitioners.
The court emphasized that compensation under writ jurisdiction or inherent powers is an exceptional remedy, only applicable in cases of established fundamental rights violations coupled with malafides or gross abuse of process. Citing the Supreme Court's judgments in Lalita Kumari v. Government of Uttar Pradesh and State of Rajasthan v. Jainudeen Shekh, the court ruled that mere registration of an FIR and its subsequent closure do not constitute a violation of fundamental rights.
Furthermore, the court rejected the argument that the FIR did not disclose a cognizable offence, clarifying that the allegations prima facie indicated involvement in narcotics trafficking and laundering, thereby justifying the FIR under the NDPS Act.
In conclusion, the court dismissed the petition, deeming it devoid of merit and unsupported by any material evidence of malafides or fundamental rights violations.
Bottom line:-
Compensation under writ jurisdiction or inherent powers is an exceptional public law remedy, available only when there is an established violation of fundamental rights, coupled with malafides or gross abuse of process causing demonstrable harm.
Statutory provision(s):
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 Section 482, NDPS Act, 1985 Sections 8A, 27B, 29
