Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Factual matrix of the case discloses compelling and exceptional circumstances justifying retest. Initial report of State Drug Control and Research Laboratory merely stated the samples did not contain heroin and (1974) 1 SCC 345 (paras 23 and 24) (1985) 3 SCC 72 (para 15) do not come under the purview of NDPS Act, 1985. There was no finding in the report with regard to the actual status/ chemical composition of the seized contraband. Hence, the report was an incomplete one and this prompted the agency to seek retest with regard to actual nature of the seized contraband. This is clearly an exceptional and compelling circumstance and has been succinctly reflected in the application for retest. To highlight the deficiency in the initial report, the agency clarified that the seized articles had not been tested for presence of other narcotic substance like codeine/ morphine. These compelling circumstances justify a retest which came to be allowed by order dated 03.02.2018. Upon retesting by CFSL, the samples were found to contain Monoactylmorphine, Acetylcodeine and Alprazolam which are narcotic/ psychotropic substances under the NDPS Act. Since the initial test report was ex facie an incomplete one and did not disclose the exact status/ chemical composition of the seized article, I am of the view there were exceptional and compelling reason for retest. It may also be relevant to note that the methodology followed by the State Drugs Control and Research for analyzing the samples were different from those adopted by CFSL. While the State Drug Control and Research Laboratory used HPCL (High-Performance Liquid Chromatography) method, CFSL used different methodology, namely, GC-MS (Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry), FT-IR (Fourier Transform - Infrared Spectroscopy) techniques for analysis of the samples. These compelling and exceptional circumstances fully justify retesting by CFSL in the facts of the present case.