Whether India's drug-free goal is better achieved by prioritising mandatory rehabilitation under NDPS Act over criminal prosecution of addicts is the central legal and policy debate.
Aaj ka motion yeh hai: 'Mandatory Rehabilitation Over Prosecution Must Be India's Primary Anti-Drug Policy' — yani kya drug users ko criminal prosecution ki jagah compulsory rehabilitation milni chahiye, yeh India ki pehli priority honi chahiye. Yeh ek bahut hi zaroori debate hai jo lakhon nagrikon ki zindagi aur unke adhikaron ko seedha chhooti hai. Main Counsel Aarav se gujarish karungi ki woh pehle apna paksh rakhein.
My lord, main yeh clearly kehna chahta hoon ki mandatory rehabilitation ko India ki primary anti-drug policy banana bilkul sahi aur zaroori hai — kyunki NDPS Act 1985 ki Section 36A ke saath padha jaaye to khud yeh Act addicts ke liye prosecution se zyaada treatment ka raasta kholti hai, aur Article 47 of the Constitution jo ki ek Directive Principle hai, State par seedha yeh dayitva daalta hai ki woh logon ki health aur drug-mukt jeevan ensure kare. Jab Constitution ka Article 47 aur NDPS Act ki immunity provision dono milkar kehte hain ki addict ek patient hai, criminal nahi, to humari primary policy prosecution nahi — rehabilitation honi chahiye. Sirf saza dene se supply chain nahi toot-ti, demand khatam hoti hai — aur demand tab khatam hogi jab hum addicts ka ilaaj karenge, unhe jail mein band nahi karenge.
Ref: Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act 1985 · Section 36A
My Lord, main Bina hoon, vipaksh ki taraf se, aur main is motion ka poora virodh karti hoon — kyunki yeh ek dangerous half-truth hai. Paksh yeh bhool jaata hai ki NDPS Act 1985 ki Section 36A ke antargat jo special courts aur stringent prosecution ka framework khada kiya gaya hai, woh sirf addicts ke liye nahi, balki organized drug traffickers ke liye bhi hai — aur agar hum prosecution ko secondary bana dein, toh supply chain ko koi rok nahi sakta. Article 47 of the Constitution, jo ki Directive Principles mein aata hai, State ko duty deta hai ki woh public health ki raksha kare — lekin yeh duty rehabilitation AUR deterrence, dono maangti hai, sirf ek ko primary banana poori policy ko lopsided kar deta hai.
Ref: Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act 1985 · Section 36A; Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act 1985 · Section 2
My Lord, vipaksh ka poora tark prosecution-first model par tika hai, lekin NDPS Act ki Section 36A(j) khud ek addict ko voluntary de-addiction treatment ke liye aane par prosecution se immunity deti hai — yani kanoon ne khud sweekar kiya hai ki addict ek patient hai, criminal nahi. Aur Article 47 ke under State ka constitutional dayitva hai ki woh nagarikon ki health aur standard of living sudhare — iska seedha matlab hai rehabilitation ek policy priority hona chahiye, sirf prosecution nahi. Isliye main puri dardarta ke saath kehna chahta hoon ki mandatory rehabilitation ko primary policy banana yahi NDPS Act aur Constitution dono ki asli bhavna hai.
Ref: Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act 1985 · Section 36A
My Lord, paksh ne prosecution ko dismiss karne ki baat ki, lekin woh Article 47 ke us constitutional mandate ko bhool gayi jo State par seedha duty daalta hai — 'the State shall endeavour to bring about prohibition of the consumption of intoxicating drinks and of drugs which are injurious to health.' Ab NDPS Act ki Section 36A ke provision (j) ko dekhiye — immunity sirf ek baar milti hai, aur sirf tab jab addict complete treatment kare; yeh clearly darshaata hai ki legislature ne rehabilitation ko blanket policy ke roop mein nahi, balki controlled exception ke roop mein rakha hai. Toh main yeh kehna chahti hoon, My Lord, ki mandatory rehabilitation over prosecution ek systemic flaw laayegi — trafficking ke woh bade players bhi 'addict' ka label lekar prosecution se bach niklenge, jo is motion ki sabse badi kamzori hai.
Ref: Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act 1985 · Section 36A; Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act 1985 · Section 2
Aaj ki is debate mein prosecution-first approach ke samarthak ne kaha ki NDPS Act ki stringent provisions drug trafficking ko rokne ke liye zaroori hain, jabki rehabilitation-first paksh ne kaha ki addict ek patient hai, apradhi nahi, aur State ka dayitva unhe treatment dena hai. Meri balanced legal suggestion yeh hai: NDPS Act ki Section 36A ke tahat special courts aur Section 3 ke policy framework ko is tarah amend kiya jaaye ki addicts ke liye prosecution se pehle mandatory de-addiction aur rehabilitation ka raasta khula rahe — jaise Section 36A ki immunity provision (clause j) already suggest karti hai — kyunki Article 47 ka Directive Principle State par yeh sachet kartavya dalta hai ki nagarikon ki swasthya raksha ki jaaye, aur criminal justice sirf traffickers par focus kare, victims par nahi. Ab main citizens se request karungi ki is debate ko apni understanding ke hisaab se rate karen aur apni raay share karen.
Ref: Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act 1985 · Section 36A; Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act 1985 · Section 2; Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act 1985 · Section 442