The Supreme Court on Thursday refused to interfere with a Calcutta High Court order imposing costs on the Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) for procedural lapses in filing an appeal against an acquittal in a drug-related case but reduced the penalty from ₹1 lakh to ₹50,000.
A bench comprising Justices M.M. Sundresh and K. Vinod Chandran passed the order while hearing a plea filed by the Centre challenging the High Court’s June 16, 2024 decision. The High Court had directed the NCB to pay ₹1 lakh to the West Bengal State Legal Services Authority, Kolkata, within a week and recover the amount from the officials responsible for the delay and procedural failure.
The apex court, while affirming the High Court’s censure, clarified that the penalty should be paid by the government and not recovered from individual officers, in view of a specific statement made by the Additional Solicitor General. “One thing is clear. There must be either the fault of your lawyer or your officer. It has to be either one of them,” the bench observed.
The case stemmed from the NCB’s appeal against an acquittal order passed by a special NDPS court in Barasat. The Calcutta High Court had found that the NCB had bypassed the legal requirement of obtaining leave to appeal under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (now mirrored in Section 419 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023), making the appeal procedurally invalid.
Despite the High Court repeatedly pointing out this flaw in hearings held on May 19 and again in June, the NCB persisted before ultimately seeking withdrawal of the appeal. The High Court criticized the agency’s conduct and held that allowing an unconditional withdrawal would not serve the interest of justice.
Responding to the Centre’s request for relief, the Supreme Court emphasized the need for procedural diligence and refrained from commenting on the merits of the NCB’s challenge. It also noted that delays in filing appeals were becoming a recurring issue and advised the government’s counsel to be more proactive: “Please understand your position as a lawyer. If they don’t come to you, you should know what to do. You don’t ask the Supreme Court to issue directions to validate your orders.”
While the top court reduced the cost amount to ₹50,000, it reinforced the High Court’s finding that the NCB’s conduct warranted judicial reproach and financial penalty, to ensure greater accountability in future filings.
