Special NDPS court finds TT player could not be linked to bag with drugs

Special judge AA Joglekar said that the testimonies of three NCB officers, who were prosecution witnesses, were full of material omissions and contradictions

Mumbai: The special Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) court judgement in the case of former junior table tennis champion Lalrinpuia Lalchhuankima revealed that the investigation conducted by the Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) was filled with loopholes and the agency failed to link the Mizo table tennis star to the bag which allegedly contained 3.9 kg of methaqualone, a banned psychotropic substance.

According to the NCB, in the afternoon of December 12, 2017, its Mumbai zonal unit had received specific information that an Indian passenger named Lalrinpuia, a resident of Aizawl, Mizoram was returning from Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, who would be carrying a banned psychotropic substance (Satish Bate/HT PHOTO)

In his March 14 judgement, which was made available on Friday, special judge AA Joglekar said that the testimonies of three NCB officers, who were prosecution witnesses, were full of material omissions and contradictions.

“It is true that the all the material prosecution witnesses, especially PW-1 (NCB officer Sheelbhadra Samrat), PW-3 (NCB intelligence officer Pankaj Kumar) and PW-5 (NCB superintendent Jitendra Ranjan) have supported the prosecution story, but their cross examinations have brought out material omissions and contradictions,” the judgement stated.

According to the NCB, in the afternoon of December 12, 2017, its Mumbai zonal unit had received specific information that an Indian passenger named Lalrinpuia, a resident of Aizawl, Mizoram was returning from Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, who would be carrying a banned psychotropic substance in his check-in baggage. He was expected to land at the international airport in Mumbai in early hours on December 13.

Accordingly, an NCB team led by intelligence officer Pankaj Kumar mounted surveillance at Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj International airport. After the arrival of the Ethiopian Airlines flight ET610 landed at around 4.35 am, the team intercepted the TT player after he collected his check-in baggage and completed the customs clearance.

On examining his check-in baggage — a maroon-coloured bag — the NCB officers claimed to have found a brown packet in a hidden pocket at the bottom of the bag, containing 3.9 kg white powder, which tested positive for methaqualone, a banned psychotropic substance. Lalrunpuia was arrested under stringent provisions of the NDPS act.

During the trial, Lalrinpuia’s counsel advocate Taraq Sayed pointed out that the charge sheet mentioned Lalrinpuia’s flight number as ET 610, but a photocopy of an identification tag attached to the bag mentioned flight number ET640. The latter landed at the Mumbai airport at around 7.15 am, three hours after Lalrinpuia reached Mumbai.

Special public prosecutor Leena Shinde, however, maintained that sole testimony of the official witness, investigating officer Pankaj Kumar, inspired confidence and that itself was enough to convict the player.

The special court refused to accept the prosecution version and noted that the seizure memorandum stated that the accused was intercepted with his baggage at around 4.50 am, long before flight ET640 landed, and therefore could not be linked to the offending bag.

“I am unable to understand that when the accused was intercepted at 4.50 hours on 13.12.2017 and that flight ET 640 was scheduled to arrive at 7.15 (am) on the said day itself how does prosecution connect the baggage with the accused,” said the court. In this regard, the court said this aspect of the arrival of the baggage by flight ET640 could have been explained by the airline officers, but no such person was examined by the NCB.

Sayed pointed out that there was no material to prove seizure and examination of the bag, as the two Ethiopian Airlines staff members who acted as panch (identification) witnesses were not examined. The NCB did not seize and produce the baggage identification tag, which enables passengers to claim their check-in baggage, he said.

The court also found fault with the investigating officer’s conduct in complying with the requirements of the NDPS Act, 1985 — to submit the secret information received about contraband material to the superior officer, as the faxes of information sent by the investigating officer to the zonal director at Goa and reverted the fax with the zonal director’s remarks carried the same time — 6.48 pm.