The Punjab and Haryana High Court has directed the Punjab government to pay a compensation of Rs 2 lakh to a 36-year-old man who was falsely arrested in an NDPS case after paracetamol tablets were found.
Justice Kirti Singh called the conduct of the police “deeply worrisome” and criticized their high-handedness in violating the petitioner’s fundamental rights. The court said, “It is appalling to see such neglect by those entrusted with upholding the rule of law.” The compensation, to be paid within a month, includes a condition of recovery of 50% from the salary of the erring sub-inspector, Rajinder Singh.
The case dates back to June 24, 2024, when the petitioner, a diploma holder in agriculture, was returning after inspecting paddy fields. A narrow road forced him to delay to give way to a police vehicle, which reportedly angered the officers. Two days later, he was booked in the NDPS case under Sections 22, 61 and 85 of the Act at Sultanpur Lodhi Police Station in Kapurthala.
The petitioner alleged that he was in illegal detention before the FIR was registered and said that his family was not aware of his whereabouts at that time. A forensic report submitted later confirmed that the recovered tablets contained acetaminophen (paracetamol), a non-intoxicant.
Despite this, the cancellation report was delayed by 17 days and the petitioner spent more than two months in detention before being granted bail on September 13, 2024. The High Court expressed concern over similar cases involving false NDPS allegations and directed the Director General of Police. , Punjab, to file an affidavit detailing the action planned against the erring officials.
The state’s status report filed on November 27 claimed that the FIR was registered following due process under the NDPS Act. However, it admitted the delay in filing the cancellation report and noted that a departmental inquiry had been initiated against sub-inspector Rajinder Singh.
Advocate Arshdeep Singh Cheema, who appeared as amicus curiae in the case, referred to the status report dated November 27, 2024 and submitted that the conduct of the investigating officer was questionable. He clarified that in two other similar cases, where FIRs were registered, salt of acetaminophen (paracetamol) was also found in the recovered substance.
The amicus curiae further argued that the petitioner, an educated 36-year-old, would face life-long burden due to registration of the present FIR under the serious NDPS Act offence. This will adversely affect his employment prospects and other opportunities, even if he is discharged by a competent court.
The court emphasized the need for accountability to prevent abuse of such power and ensure timely justice. This has exposed the severe mental and emotional suffering caused to the petitioner.