Furthermore, the retrospective application of the dictum in Sanjeev V. Deshpande (supra) would not give rise to any implications as regards the rights of the Accused persons Under Article 20(1) of the Constitution. This is because while overruling the decision in Rajesh Kumar Gupta (supra), the decision in Sanjeev V. Deshpande (supra) has only clarified the law as it stood from its inception and given true effect to the meaning assigned to the relevant provisions of the NDPS Act and the Rules thereunder, by the lawmakers. The same cannot be construed as creating a new offence. Additionally, the overruling of a decision cannot be equated to the enactment of an ex-post facto law, especially when the interpretation given to the statute/provision in the overruling decision is not a novel and unreasonably expansive interpretation of the provision in question such that it was completely unforeseeable. It cannot be reasonably argued that the indiscriminate dealing in of substances which are only mentioned under the Schedule to the NDPS Act and absent under Schedule I of the NDPS Rules, was indubitably legal and allowed by the legislation, prior to the decision in Sanjeev V. Deshpande (supra). Therefore, there remains no doubt in our minds that giving retrospective effect to the decision in Sanjeev V. Deshpande (supra) would be necessary considering the facts and circumstances in the background of which we are called upon to adjudicate these matters. {Para 159}
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Criminal Appeal Nos. 1319 of 2013 and 272 of 2014
Decided On: 17.04.2025
Directorate of Revenue Intelligence Vs. Raj Kumar Arora and Ors.
Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
J.B. Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, JJ.
Author: J.B. Pardiwala, J.
Citation: MANU/SC/0500/2025,2025 INSC 498.
Read full judgment here: Click here.
Print Page
No comments:
Post a Comment