(1) Any officer, on whom any duty has been imposed by or under this Act and who ceases or refuses to perform or withdraws himself from the duties of his office shall, unless he has obtained the express written permission of his official superior or has other lawful excuse for so doing, be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year or with fine or with both.
1[(2) Any officer on whom any duty has been imposed by or under this Act or any person who has been given the custody of–
(a) any addict; or
(b) any other person who has been charged with an offence under this Act,
and who wilfully aids in, or connives at, the contravention of any provision of this Act or any rule or order made thereunder, shall be punishable with rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than ten years but which may extend to twenty years, and shall also be liable to fine which shall not be less than one lakh rupees but which may extend to two lakh rupees.
Explanation.— For the purposes of this sub-section, the expression “officer” includes any person employed in a hospital or institution maintained or recognised by the Government or a local authority under section 64A for providing de-addiction treatment.]
(3) No court shall take cognizance of any offence under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) except on a complaint in writing made with the previous sanction of the Central Government, or as the case may be, the State Government.
1. Subs. by Act 2 of 1989, s. 16, for sub-section (2) (w.e.f. 29-5-1989).
Simplified Explanation
Section 59 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 addresses the failure of officers in the discharge of their duties or their connivance (secret cooperation) at the contravention of the Act. This section establishes penalties for dereliction of duty or aiding and abetting violations of the provisions of the Act by officers and other personnel involved in enforcing it. It is an important provision to ensure that officers perform their duties effectively, and if they fail to do so or assist in illegal activities, they are held accountable.
Text Breakdown and Explanation
Subsection (1): Failure to perform duties
- Duty of officers: This provision applies to officers who are assigned duties under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (such as law enforcement, regulatory, and treatment-related duties).
- Failure or refusal to perform duties:
- If an officer ceases or refuses to perform the duties imposed by the Act (e.g., investigating drug-related offences, conducting searches, making arrests), they are committing a breach of duty.
- If an officer withdraws themselves from their duties without obtaining proper authorization from their official superior (higher-ranking officer) or without a lawful excuse, they are in violation of their responsibilities.
- Penalty:
- The officer can be punished with imprisonment for up to one year, or fined, or both. The provision emphasizes the importance of carrying out one’s duties and ensures that officers cannot abandon or refuse their responsibilities without facing consequences.
Subsection (2): Aiding or conniving at the contravention of the Act
- Aiding or conniving at contravention:
- This subsection targets officers or persons (including those in hospitals or institutions providing de-addiction treatment, as clarified in the Explanation) who willfully assist or connive (actively or passively allow) the violation of any provision of the Act, or any rules or orders made under it.
- Specifically, it focuses on aiding in contravention or conniving at the violation of the Act in the following cases:
- Addicts: Persons who are responsible for the care or treatment of individuals with drug addiction (including hospital or treatment facility staff).
- Persons charged with offences under the Act: Officers or persons who are responsible for the custody or oversight of individuals charged with narcotic-related crimes.
- Penalties for aiding or conniving at violations:
- If an officer or person willfully aids or connives at the contravention of the provisions of the Act, they will face:
- Rigorous imprisonment for a term of not less than 10 years, but it may extend up to 20 years.
- A fine that is not less than one lakh rupees but may extend up to two lakh rupees.
- This severe punishment is meant to deter any form of corruption or complicity in the illegal activities covered by the Act, especially in areas such as drug trafficking, drug abuse, and illegal drug manufacturing.
- If an officer or person willfully aids or connives at the contravention of the provisions of the Act, they will face:
- Explanation: The explanation clarifies that the term “officer” in this subsection also includes persons employed in hospitals or institutions recognized or maintained by the government (or local authority) under Section 64A for providing de-addiction treatment. This ensures that individuals involved in addiction treatment are also held accountable if they are found to be aiding or conniving with the violation of the Act.
Subsection (3): Cognizance of offences
- Cognizance by the court: No court can take cognizance (start legal proceedings) of any offence under subsections (1) or (2) unless a complaint in writing is made with the previous sanction of the Central Government or the State Government.
- Cognizance refers to the process by which a court takes note of an offence and begins legal proceedings. The requirement of previous sanction ensures that there is official oversight and approval before legal action is initiated against officers for failure to perform their duties or for aiding in violations of the Act. This serves to prevent frivolous or politically motivated actions against officers.
Purpose and Implications of Section 59
- Accountability of Law Enforcement Officers:
- Section 59 ensures that officers involved in enforcing the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act are held accountable for their actions. Officers who fail to perform their duties, or who assist or tolerate illegal activities, will face significant consequences. This is crucial in ensuring that the Act is implemented effectively and without compromise.
- Preventing Corruption and Abuse of Power:
- The provision targets potential corruption or abuse of power by officers and other personnel involved in the enforcement of the Act. The severe penalties for conniving or aiding in illegal activities related to narcotics underscore the seriousness with which such offences are treated.
- For example, an officer involved in allowing or facilitating the trafficking of narcotic drugs would be subject to up to 20 years of rigorous imprisonment and a substantial fine. This serves as a strong deterrent against corruption within law enforcement.
- Deterrence Against Dereliction of Duty:
- The one-year penalty for officers who fail to perform their duties (without lawful excuse) helps to ensure that personnel remain committed to their roles and responsibilities under the Act. This penalty ensures that officers do not abandon their posts or duties without proper cause, maintaining discipline and efficiency within law enforcement.
- Protection Against Misuse of Power:
- The requirement for prior sanction before the initiation of legal proceedings against an officer ensures that legal actions are based on credible and authorized complaints, preventing any unjust or arbitrary actions against officers. This safeguard ensures that officers are not unfairly targeted or harassed but rather face action only when there is just cause.
Practical Example
- Scenario 1:
A narcotics officer who has been assigned to investigate a drug trafficking case refuses to perform their duty and withdraws from the investigation without prior authorization. As per Section 59(1), this officer could face imprisonment for up to 1 year or a fine for dereliction of duty. - Scenario 2:
A hospital worker employed at a government-recognized drug rehabilitation center is found to be aiding a drug trafficker by providing false reports about the individual’s treatment status, enabling the trafficker to evade arrest. Under Section 59(2), this individual could face 10 to 20 years of imprisonment and a fine of up to 2 lakh rupees for conniving at the violation of the Act. - Scenario 3:
An officer in charge of overseeing prisoners who have been arrested under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act is found to be helping prisoners escape or allowing them to smuggle narcotics. This officer would be subject to the same severe penalties under Section 59(2) as they are aiding and abetting criminal activities.
Summary
Section 59 ensures that officers and persons involved in the enforcement of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act are held accountable for their actions. Officers who fail to perform their duties or connive at illegal activities face severe penalties, including imprisonment for up to 20 years and a fine of up to 2 lakh rupees. This provision is crucial in preventing dereliction of duty and corruption within law enforcement and ensuring that the Act is implemented with integrity. The provision also includes safeguards such as prior sanction before legal action can be initiated against officers, ensuring that proceedings are based on valid complaints.
