The five judges constitutional bench of Supreme Court in case of Mukesh Singh vs State ( NCB Delhi) decided on 31/8/2020 settled the issue by overruling the judgment of court in case of Mohan Lal vs State of Punjab in 2018 where it said that trial of NDPS case stand vitiated if complainant and Investigating officer is the same person.
Supreme court observed:-
—I.
THAT THE OBSERVATIONS OF THIS COURT IN THE CASES OF BHAGWAN SINGH V. STATE OF
RAJASTHAN (1976) 1 SCC 15; MEGHA SINGH V. STATE OF HARYANA (1996) 11 SCC 709;
AND STATE BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NIB, TAMIL NADU V. RAJANGAM (2010) 15 SCC 369
— AND THE ACQUITTAL OF THE ACCUSED BY
THIS COURT ON THE GROUND THAT AS THE INFORMANT AND THE INVESTIGATOR WAS THE
SAME, IT HAS VITIATED THE TRIAL AND THE ACCUSED IS ENTITLED TO ACQUITTAL ARE TO
BE TREATED TO BE CONFINED TO THEIR OWN FACTS.
—IT
CANNOT BE SAID THAT IN THE AFORESAID DECISIONS, THIS COURT LAID DOWN ANY
GENERAL PROPOSITION OF LAW THAT IN EACH AND EVERY CASE WHERE THE INFORMANT IS
THE INVESTIGATOR THERE IS A BIAS CAUSED TO THE ACCUSED AND THE ENTIRE
PROSECUTION CASE IS TO BE DISBELIEVED AND THE ACCUSED IS ENTITLED TO ACQUITTAL;
—II.
IN A CASE WHERE THE INFORMANT HIMSELF IS THE INVESTIGATOR, BY THAT ITSELF
CANNOT BE SAID THAT THE INVESTIGATION IS VITIATED ON THE GROUND OF BIAS OR THE
LIKE FACTOR. THE QUESTION OF BIAS OR PREJUDICE WOULD DEPEND UPON THE FACTS AND
CIRCUMSTANCES OF EACH CASE.
—THEREFORE, MERELY BECAUSE THE
INFORMANT IS THE INVESTIGATOR, BY THAT ITSELF THE INVESTIGATION WOULD NOT
SUFFER THE VICE OF UNFAIRNESS OR BIAS AND THEREFORE ON THE SOLE GROUND THAT
INFORMANT IS THE INVESTIGATOR, THE ACCUSED IS NOT ENTITLED TO ACQUITTAL. THE
MATTER HAS TO BE DECIDED ON A CASE TO CASE BASIS.
—A
CONTRARY DECISION OF THIS COURT IN THE CASE OF MOHAN LAL V. STATE OF PUNJAB
(2018) 17 SCC 627 AND ANY OTHER DECISION TAKING A CONTRARY VIEW THAT THE
INFORMANT CANNOT BE THE INVESTIGATOR AND IN SUCH A CASE THE ACCUSED IS ENTITLED
TO ACQUITTAL ARE NOT GOOD LAW AND THEY ARE SPECIFICALLY OVERRULED
