The Supreme Court of India restored criminal proceedings against accused persons in a case involving evidence tampering in an NDPS matter from 1990. It overturned a Kerala High Court decision quashing these proceedings, emphasizing that judicial integrity cannot be compromised and directing the trial to be expedited within one year.

1. Case Background

• Origin: The case stems from a 1990 NDPS incident involving an Australian national, Andrew Salvatore, caught with charas at Thiruvananthapuram Airport.
• Seized Item: An item of evidence, the accused’s underwear (Mo2), was allegedly tampered with during the judicial process, casting doubt on its authenticity.

2. High Court's Judgment (2023)

• The Kerala High Court quashed the proceedings in Crime No. 215/1994, citing Section 195(1)(b) CrPC, which bars prosecution without a court complaint.
• It directed administrative steps under Section 195 but quashed the criminal case entirely.

3. Supreme Court Appeal (2024)

• SLP Filed by M.R. Ajayan: A journalist contested the High Court's decision, highlighting the importance of judicial scrutiny in evidence tampering cases.
• SLP Filed by Antony Raju: An accused in the case appealed against the High Court's directive for de novo proceedings.

4. Supreme Court's Findings

• On Locus Standi: The journalist had the right to approach the court, as tampering with judicial evidence undermines justice.
• On Bar Under Section 195 CrPC: The bar does not apply here because the proceedings originated from judicial directives, ensuring the case's legitimacy.
• On De Novo Proceedings: The Supreme Court upheld the need for retrial given the gravity of the allegations.

5. Court Directions

• The Supreme Court reinstated the proceedings, emphasizing that judicial integrity is paramount.
• Directed the trial to conclude within one year and set a deadline for the accused to appear in court.

Acts and Sections Discussed

• Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985: Section 20(b)(ii) concerning possession of narcotics.
• Indian Penal Code (IPC): Sections 120B (criminal conspiracy), 193 (false evidence), 201 (causing disappearance of evidence), 217 (disobedience by a public servant), and 420 (cheating).
• Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC): Section 195(1)(b), which bars certain prosecutions unless initiated by a court complaint.

Legal Ratio:

1. Judicial Supervision of Evidence Tampering: The judiciary must protect its processes from manipulation, as such acts erode trust in justice.
2. Scope of Section 195 CrPC: This provision does not preclude action initiated under judicial directives, even if evidence tampering occurred.
3. Fair Trial Principles: Exceptional circumstances, such as significant procedural violations, justify retrial to avert miscarriage of justice.

Subjects:

Criminal Law, Evidence Tampering, Judicial Integrity

#NDPSAct #EvidenceTampering #JudicialProcess #Retrial