The Calcutta High Court on Wednesday ordered disciplinary action against two judicial officers for failing to provide legal aid to an accused arrested under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act.

Justice Krishna Rao, while granting bail to accused Sudhar Mangar, noted that the accused was not represented by a lawyer when produced before the Chief Judicial Magistrate and later the District & Sessions Judge (NDPS), Alipurduar.

“This order be forwarded to the Registrar General of the High Court for information of the Hon’ble the Chief Justice and necessary action against the Chief Judicial Magistrate and District and Sessions Judge (NDPS), Alipurduar,” the Court directed, observing that the accused remained undefended at critical stages of judicial custody.

Mangar was arrested on March 28, 2024, after 40 bottles of Rc-Kuff cough syrup were allegedly seized from his residence. Seeking bail, he contended that he was not informed of the grounds of arrest—an omission that violated his fundamental rights under Article 22(1) of the Constitution and Section 52(1) of the NDPS Act.

The prosecution argued that a written communication of arrest grounds was not mandatory and highlighted the stringent bail conditions applicable in commercial quantity NDPS cases. However, the Court found that the arrest memo made no mention of the grounds for arrest and lacked any column dedicated to such information. It also noted that while the State claimed the grounds were explained through other documents like the case diary and forwarding report, no proof was produced to establish that the accused was actually informed.

“Considering the above, this Court finds that while arresting the petitioner, the Arresting Officer has violated the provisions of Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India and Section 52(1) of the NDPS Act, 1985,” Justice Rao held.

Emphasizing that Article 22(1) guarantees every arrested person the right to be informed promptly of the reasons for arrest, the Court remarked that this communication must be “meaningful” and not a mere formality. In Mangar’s case, the Court found this safeguard had been entirely disregarded.

In light of the violations, the Court granted bail to Mangar.

Advocates Subhankar Dutta, Arjun Chowdhury, P Dutta Chowdhury, Sunayana Parveen, Riya Agarwal, Mantu Mandal, Bappaditya Roy, Soumyadeep Paul, and Swagata Mitra appeared for the petitioner. The State was represented by Advocates Aditi Shankar Chakraborty, Nilay Chakraborty, and Biswarup Roy.