1[53A. Relevancy of statements under certain circumstances.– (1) A statement made and signed by a person before any officer empowered under section 53 for the investigation of offences, during the course of any inquiry or proceedings by such officer, shall be relevant for the purpose of proving, in any prosecution for an offence under this Act, the truth of the facts which it contains,
(a) when the person who made the statement is dead or connot be found, or is incapable of giving evidence, or is kept out of the way by the adverse party, or whose presence cannot be obtained without an amount of delay or expense which, under the circumstances of the case, the court considers unreasonable; or
(b) when the person who made the statement is examined as a witness in the case before the court and the court is of the opinion that, having regard to the circumstances of the case, the statement should be admitted in evidence in the interest of justice.
(2) The provisions of sub-section (1) shall, so far as may be, apply in relation to any proceedings under this Act or the rules or orders made thereunder, other than a proceeding before a court, as they apply in relation to a proceeding before a court.]
1. Ins. by Act 2 of 1989, s. 15 (w.e.f. 29-5-1989).
Simplified Explanation
Section 53A of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 deals with the relevancy of statements made during investigations in certain circumstances. This provision allows for the use of statements made by a person under investigation in a way that might not ordinarily be permissible in court. Here’s a detailed explanation of the section:
Subsection (1) – Admissibility of Statements in Court
This subsection outlines when a statement made by a person to an officer empowered to investigate offences under this Act (as per Section 53) can be considered relevant evidence in court for the purpose of proving the facts contained in the statement.
The statement will be admissible in the following situations:
(a) When the Person Who Made the Statement is Unavailable
A statement made by a person can be used as evidence if the person who made it:
- Is dead: If the person is no longer alive, their statement can be used.
- Cannot be found: If the person is missing or unreachable.
- Is incapable of giving evidence: If the person is physically or mentally unable to testify in court (e.g., incapacitated due to illness).
- Is kept out of the way by the adverse party: If the person has been intentionally hidden or prevented from being available by someone opposing the prosecution or defence.
- Presence cannot be obtained without unreasonable delay or expense: If obtaining the person’s presence in court would cause an undue delay or be too costly, the statement can be used instead.
(b) When the Person Who Made the Statement is a Witness in Court
If the person who made the statement is present as a witness in the case and the court deems it just and necessary, the statement may be admitted in evidence in the interest of justice. This means that the court can use the statement to corroborate the witness’s testimony or in cases where the court believes the statement will help clarify the matter at hand.
Subsection (2) – Application Beyond Court Proceedings
This subsection extends the provisions of subsection (1) to proceedings outside the courtroom (i.e., during the investigation or other legal proceedings) under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act or related rules/orders.
- The rules for the admissibility of statements in investigation and inquiry processes are the same as for court proceedings, as long as the proceedings are in relation to the Act or its associated rules.
Purpose and Implications of Section 53A
The primary aim of Section 53A is to ensure that relevant and truthful statements made during investigations can be used in court even when the person who made them is unavailable or cannot be cross-examined. This can be crucial in drug-related offences where witnesses or suspects may be difficult to locate, unwilling to testify, or dead by the time the case goes to trial.
Key Features:
- Ensures Justice is Served: By allowing relevant statements to be admitted in evidence, the law helps prevent cases from being hindered by the unavailability of witnesses or suspects.
- Flexibility in Evidence Handling: It ensures that even if a key person cannot testify in court, their statements (if made under proper investigation procedures) can still play a role in the judicial process.
- Helps in Complex Cases: In narcotic-related cases, where trafficking networks often involve people who are elusive, untraceable, or intimidated, this provision ensures that vital information is not excluded just because the person who provided it is unavailable.
Examples of When This Would Apply
- Death of a Suspect: If a suspect dies before the trial, but the police had recorded their statement during the investigation, that statement can be used in court as evidence of the facts the person disclosed.
- Incapacitation or Unavailability: If a witness who made a statement to the authorities is severely injured or ill and cannot appear in court, their statement can still be admissible in the trial.
- Witness Intimidation: If a key witness is coerced or threatened and is unable to testify in court, their previously recorded statement can be used to ensure the trial proceeds fairly.
Summary
Section 53A allows statements made by a person during the course of an investigation to be admissible in court under specific circumstances when the person who made the statement is unavailable (e.g., dead, missing, incapacitated, or otherwise untraceable). The provision ensures that relevant and truthful evidence is not excluded due to the absence of the individual, and it applies not only to court proceedings but also to other legal proceedings under the Act. This provision is especially helpful in ensuring that drug-related crimes are properly investigated and prosecuted, even when key witnesses or suspects cannot testify in person.
