Holding

The Narcotics Control Bureau, though not created by the NDPS Act, is an authority constituted under the Act and functions as a department of the Government, making the notifications empowering its officers to exercise powers under Sections 36A, 41, 42 and 67 valid, and the complaint filed by its officer authorized.

Summary

The State, represented by the Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB), appealed against the Delhi High Court's order that quashed the conviction of Kulwant Singh under Section 21 of the NDPS Act, holding that the NCB was not a department and therefore its officers lacked authority to conduct search, seizure and arrest. The Supreme Court examined whether the NCB is a statutory authority or a department of the Government, interpreting Section 4 of the NDPS Act and the meaning of "department". It held that Section 4 merely authorises the Central Government to constitute authorities, and the NCB, created by a Gazette notification, is a wing of the Department of Revenue and thus a department of the Government. Consequently, the notifications empowering NCB officers to exercise powers under Sections 36A, 41, 42, 53 and 67 are valid, and the complaint lodged by an NCB officer is authorized. The Court set aside the High Court’s judgment in Criminal Appeal No. 1139 of 2000, remitting the matter for disposal on merits, and dismissed the separate appeal (Criminal Appeal No. 197 of 2003).

Issues considered

The legal status of the Narcotics Control Bureau under the NDPS Act: whether it is a statutory authority or a department of the Government.
Whether notifications empowering NCB officers to exercise powers of search, seizure and arrest under Sections 36A, 41, 42, 53 and 67 of the NDPS Act are valid.
Whether a complaint filed by an NCB officer is authorized under Section 36A(1)(d).
The interpretation of the term "department" in the context of the NDPS Act.
Whether Section 4 of the NDPS Act creates the NCB or merely authorises the Central Government to constitute it.

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedures. 482
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985s. 21, s. 36A, s. 4, s. 41, s. 42, s. 53, s. 67

Subjects

NDPS ActNarcotics Control Bureaudepartment definitionsearch and seizurestatutory authorityinterpretation of statutescriminal procedurespecial courtcomplaint validitygovernment notifications

Judgment

STATE THROUGH NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU A
v.
KULWANT SINGH

FEBRUARY 11, 2003

[N. SANTOSH HEGDE AND B.P. SINGH, JJ.] B

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985-Sections 4, 21,
36A, 41. 42, 53 and 67-Narcotic Control Bureau-legal status of-Held,
Narcotic Control Bureau is not an authority created or constituted by an Act, C
but an authority created under the Act-It is not a distinct legal entity but
department of the Government-Thus, notifications empowering the officers of
NCB to exercise powers of search, seizure and arrests under sections 36A, 41,
42 and 67 legal and valid-Hence complaint lodged by such officer is also
authorized.
D
Interpretation of statues-In the absence of any precise definition of the
word it must be given .ifs natural and ordinary meaning, unless the legal
context in l-vhich the word is used requires a different meaning.

Words and Phrases:
E
'Department '-Meaning of-Discussed

Respondent was convicted and sentenced for offences punishable
under Section 21 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act,
1985. High Court quashed the order. It held that Narcotics Control
Bureau(NCB) not being a department of the Government, the complaint F
filed by an authorised officer of NCB was without authority of law as the
officer could not be authorised to effect search, seizure and arrest under
the Act.

1 In the other appeal the High Court of Karnataka dismissed the
' petition under section 482 Cr.P.C. taking a contrary view. Hence the G
present apptrals,

Respondent contended that the Notifications which purport to vest
such powers In the officers of the NCB are invalid and Illegal as NCB being
a creature of the statute, It cannot be termed as a department of the H
995
996 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2003) I S.C.R.

A Government; that the NCR could only perform the functions enumerated
in the notification constituting the NCR since these functions do not include .
the functions enumerated in Section 4(2)(e) of the Act; and that the power +-
of the NCR to exercise those functions could not be enlarged by issuance
of Notifications under Sections 41, 42, 53 or 67 of .the Act as that would
B be violative of Section 4 of the Act under which the NCR was constituted.

Disposing of the appeals, the Court

HELD: 1.1. Section 4(1) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic
Substances Act, 1985 does not create the Narcotics Control Bureau. It only
C authorizes the Central Government to take all such measures, as it deems
necessary or expedient for the purpose of preventing and combating abuse
of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances and the illicit traffic therein.
Sub-section 2 enumerates only some of the measures which the Central -~-
Government may take and sub-section 3 empowers and enables the
Central Government in its discretion to constitute an authority or a
D hierarchy of authorities for taking measures with respect to such of the
.matters referred to in sub-section 2. The order constituting the authority
is required to be published in the Official Gazette. It is apparent on a mere
perusal of Section 4 that the Act does not itself create an authority, but
empowers the Central Government to do so in its discretion. The authority
E envisaged by the Section is constituted by the exercise of executive power
by the Central Government which notifies its order constituting the
authority by publishing the same in the Official Gazette enumerating the
powers and functions to be exercised by it, subject to the supervision and
control of the Central Government. Thus, the NCB is not an authority
created or constituted by the Act, but an authority created under the Act
F and the view taken by the Karnataka High Court is accepted.
(1006-G, H; 1007-A-CI .__..

1.2. Moreover, unlike statutory authorities created by an Act of the
legislature, the NCR is not a body corporate having perpetual succession
and a common seal, with power to acquire, hold and dispose of property t)
G and capable of suing or being sued. It is clearly not a distinct legal entity.
The notified order constituting the NCB makes this abundantly clear by
providing that the NCR shall be headed by a Director General who will
be assisted at the Headquarters and in the Zonal Offices by such officers
as may be appointed by the Central Government from time to time. The
H powers and functions that it is authorized to exercise are such of the
STATE THROUGH NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU r_ KULWANT SlNGH 997

powers and functions of the Central Government which are enumerated A ·
in the order constituting it, and that too subject to the supervision and
control of the· Central Government. (1007-D, E(

1.3. The office memorandum of the Government of India clarified
that the Director General, NCB, under the over all supervision of the
Revenue Secretary will bo responsible for devising and undertaking B
programmes for strengthening and modernizing the Narcotics Intelligence
Agencies in the country. The Director General is assisted by such officers
as may be appointed by the Central Government from time to time. The
Director General, NCB has also been declared by the President as the Head
of Department for the purpose of exercising financial powers in respect C
of NCB. The President or India in exercise of powers conferred by the
proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India has framed the
Department of Revenue (Narcotics Control Bureau) (Group C and Group
D posts) Recruitment Rules, 1992, and Department of Revenue Narcotics
Central Bureau (Intelligence Officers) Recruitment Rules, 1996. Thus it
is concluded that the NCB is merely a wing or branch or the Department. D
or Revenue of the Government of India. The NCB is not constituted as a
distinct legal entity, and therefore, has no independent existence, except
as a branch or wing of the Department of Revenue dealing with matters
entrusted to it by the notified order constituting it. Therefore, the
notifications empowering the officers to exercise the powers under Sections E
36A, 41, 42 and 67 must be held to be legal and valid. The search and
seizure carried out by such officers and the arrests made by them in
exercise of such power is authorized and warranted. The complaint lodged
by the empowered officer under Section 36A(l)(d) is also authorized.
(1008-D-G(
F
State of Punjab and Ors. v. Raja Ram and Ors., (198112 SCC 66, relied
on.

1.4. The submission that the notification constituting the NCB having
excluded the functions under Section 4(2)(c) of the Act, the power of NCB
could not be enlarged by subordinate legislation by issuance of notification G
under the Act empowering officers of NCB to exercise the powers or entry,
search, seizure and arrest cannot be accepted since the relevant provisions
authorize the empowerment of officers of any department of the
Government of India. (1009-A-C(

l.S. By the issuance or the Notifications, the Government has only H
998 SUPREME COURT REPORTS r2003] I S.C.R.

A authorized a class of its officials in various departments of the Government
including the Department of Revenue of which the NCB is a wing or
branch to exercise powers under Sections 36A, 41, 42 and 67. A statutory
duty has been cast on the Central Gonrnment to take all such measures
as it deems necessary or expedient for the purpose of preventing and
combating abuse of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances and the
B illicit traffic therein. Obviously the Central Government must act in
discharge of the legislative mandate effectively and to do so it must
necessarily act through its officers. The provisions of the Act authorized
the Central Government ~o empower such officers to exercise powers
under various provisions of the Act. Since the Act itself confers such an
C authority on the Central Government, no exception can be taken to the
exercise of such authority. By so empowering its officers, the Central
Government purports to effectively perform the obligations cast upon it
by law. The mere fact that some of the officers of the NCB are also
authorized to exercise such powers does not amount to enlarging the
powers and jurisdiction of the NCB as conferred on it by the notified order
D of the Central Government constituting NCR. 11009-D-GI

Jasbir Singh v. Vipin Kumar Jaggi and Ors., (2001) 8 SCC 289, relied
on.

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal No.
E 1139 of 2000.

From the Judgment and Order dated 13.12.2000 of the High Court of
Delhi at New Delhi in Crl. Appeal No. 248 of 1997.
WITH
F Criminal Appeal No. 197 of 2003.

Altaf Ahmed, ASG, Ms. Binu Tamta, Ms. Sushma Suri, Harjinder Singh,
Yogesh Saxena, Ms. Vandana Sharma, Navdeep Brar, Ajay Shanna, Sunil K.
Mehta, Arun K. Sinha and Rakesh Singh for the Appellants.

G The Judgment of the Court was delivered by

8.P. SINGH, J. Special Leave granted in S.L.P. (Crl.) No. 3816 of
2002.

In both these appeals common questions arise for consideration and
H hence they have been heard together and are being disposed of by this judgment
f
STATE THROUGH NARCOTICS cm:TROL BUREAU ••. KULWANT SINGH (8.P. SINGH. J.( 999

and order. A
Criminal Appeal No. 1139 of 2000 has been preferred by the State
through the Narcotics Control Bureau and is directed against the judgment
and order of the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi dated December 13. 2000
in Criminal Appeal No.248 of 1997. The High Court by its impugned judgment
and order quashed the order of conviction and sentence of the respondent B
passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi, in Sessions Case No. 73 of
1996 dated 24th May, 1997 and acquitted the respondent of the charge levelled
against him under Section 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic
Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). It was held that
the complaint filed by an authorized officer of the Narcotics Control Bureau C
(hereinafter referred to as 'the NCB') was without authority of law inasmuch
as the officers of the 'NCB could not be authorized to effect search, seizure
and arrest under the Act, the NCB not being a department of the Government.
Consequently all actions taken by them were illegal since the proceedings
taken in respect of the offences under the Act were by officers not legally
empowered to do so. D
In Criminal Appeal arising out ofSLP (Crl.) No.3816 of2002 the High
Court of Kamataka at Bangalore 'by its judgment and order dated 30th
November, 200 I in Criminal Petition No.669 of 200 I negatived a similar
contention urged on behalf of the appellant in that appeal and held that the
officers of the NCB could be and were duly empowered under the Act to E
conduct investigation including the power of search, seizure and arrest. It
held that the NCB was not a statutory authority and was indeed a department
of the Government. Consequently its officers could be authorised under the
Act to perform these functions. Accordingly the Criminal Petition filed by
the appellant herein under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for F
quashing the proceeding and the order framing charge was rejected.
>
In Criminal Appeal No.1139 of 2000 the respondent herein was
apprehended by a team comprising of officers of the NCB and on search of
his vehicle, after complying with necessary formalities under the Act, a
polythene bag was recovered which contained brownish substance which was G
tested on the spot with the field testing kit and tested positive for heroin. The
total quantity recovered was 0.980 Kg. The respondent was accordingly
prosecuted in Sessions Case No. 73 of 1996 and found guilty by the Additional
Sessions Judge, Delhi, who sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment for 10
years and a tine of Rs. I lakh and in default of payment of tine, to undergo
rigorous imprisonment for 6 months for the offence punishable under Section H
1000 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2003) I S.C.R.

A 21 of the Act. The High Court has not considered the case on merit by
'
reference to the 'evidence on record since it found that the entire proceeding
was illegal inasmuch as the search, seizure, recovery of offending articles
and arrest of the respondent was done by the officers of the NCB who had
no power to take such action and to prosecute the respondent.

B Section 4 of the Act provides as follows :-

"4. Central Government to take measures for preventing and combating
abuse of and illicit traffic in narcotic drugs, etc. (I) Subject to the
provisions of the Act, the Central Government shall take all such
measures as it deems necessary or expedient for the purpose of
c preventing and combating abuse of narcotic drugs and psychotropic
substances and the illicit traffic therein.

(2) In particular and without prejudice to the generality of the
provisions of sub-section (I), the measures which the Central
Government may take under the sub-section include measures with
D
respect to all or any of the following matters, namely :-

(a) coordination of actions by various officers, State Governments
and other authorities - ~

(i) under this Act, or
--i-
E
(ii) under any other Jaw for the time being in force in connection
with tlie enforcement of the provisions of this Act;

(b) obligations under the International Conventions;

F (c) assistance to the concerned authorities in foreign countrie~ and
concerned international organizations with a view to facilitating ,......t/
coordination and universal action for prevention and suppression
of illicit traffic in narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances;

(d) identification, treatment, education, after care, rehabilitation and
G social re-integration of addicts;

(e) such other matters as the Central government deems necessary or
expedient for the purpose of securing the effective implementation
of the provisions of this Act and preventing and combating the
<- ,

abuse of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances and illicit
H traffic therein.
STATE THROUGH NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU '- KUL WANT SINGH (8.P. SINGH. J.J 1. OOJ

(3) The Central government may. if it considers it necessary or A
expedient so to do for the purpose of this Act, by order, published in
the Official Gazette, constitute an authority or a hierarchy of authorities
by such name or names as may be specified in the order for the
purpose of exercising such of the powers and functions of the Central
Government under this Act and for taking measures with respect to
such of the manors referred to in sub-section (2) as may be mentioned B
in the order, and subject to the supervision and control of the Central
Government and the provisions of such order, such authority or
authorities may exercise the powers and take the measures so
mentioned in the order as if such authority or authorities had been
empowered by this Act to exercise those powers and take such C
measures".

By Notification No. S.O. 96(E) dated 17th March, 1986 the Central
Government through the Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue) in
exercise of powers conferred by sub-section (3) of Section 4 of the Act
constituted an authority to be known as the "Narcotics Control Bureau" to D
exercise powers and functions of the Central Government in taking measures
with respect to the following matters referred to in sub-section (2) of Section
4 :-

"(I) Co-ordination of actions by various officers, State Governments
and other authorities under the principal Act, the Customs Act, 1962 E
(52 of 1962), the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 (23 of 1940) and
by other law for the time being in force in connection with the
enforcement of the provisions of the principal Act.

(2) Implementation of the obligations in respect of counter-measures
against illicit traffic, under :- F
(a) the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961;

(b) the Protocol of 1972 amending the aforesaid Convention;

(c) the Convention on Psychotropic Substances, 1971; and
G
(d) any other international convention or protocol or other instrument
amending an international convention relating to narcotic drugs
or psychotropic substances which may be ratified or acceded to
by India hereafter.

(3) Assistance to concerned authorities in foreign countries and H
1002 SUPREME COURT REPORTS P0031 I S.C.R.

A concerned international organizations with a view to facilitating co-
ordination· and universal action for prevention and suppression of
illicit traffic in narcotic drugs and psychotropic ~ubstances".

The Notification further provided that the NCB would have its
Headquarters at New Delhi with five Zonal Offices at Bombay, Calcutta,
B Delhi, Madras and Varansai. It further provided that the Bureau shall be
headed by a Director General who will be assisted at the Headquarters and
in the Zonal Offices by such officers as may be appointed by the Central y.
Government.

C We may notice at this stage that clause (e) of sub-section (2) of Section
4 was not included in the Government's order notified on I 7th March, I 986.
Clause (e) of sub-section 2 of Section 4 is as follows :-

"(e) such other matters as the Central government deems necessary or
expedient for the purpose of securing the effective implementation of
the provisions of this Act and preventing and combating the abuse of
D
narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances and illicit traffic therein."

The respondent contends that the non inclusion of the matters contained
in the clause (e) of sub-section (2) of Section 4 is very material, and an
argument was sought to be advanced before the High Court to which we shall
E advert later.

Under Section 36A offences under the Act are triable only by the
Special Court constituted for the area in which the offence has been committed.
Section 36A(l)(a) and (d) are relevant, and they read as under :-

F "36A. Offences triable by Special Courts (I) Notwithstanding anything
contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, I 973 ~

(a) all offences under this Act shall be triable only by the Special
Court constituted for the area in which the offence has been
committed or where there are more Special Courts than .. one for
G such area, by such one of them as may be sJ)ebified in this behalf
by the Government.

(b) -(. _
_,~

,.,,,____
(c)

H (d) a Special Court may, upon a perusal of police report of the facts
STATE THROUGH NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU ,. KULWANT SINGH (B.P. SINGH, I.) J 003
., constituting an offence under this Act or upon a complaint made A
by an officer of the Central Government or a State Government
authorized in this· behalf, take cognizance of that offence without
the accused being committed to it for trial."

Accordingly a Notification was issued by the Government of India,
Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue) dated 27th September, 1989 B
whereby in exercise of powers conferred by clause (d) of sub-section (I) of
Section 36A of the l\ct the Central Government authorized the officers above
the rank of Inspector in the Departments of Customs, Central Excise, Narcotics,
Revenue Intelligence, Central Economic Intelligence Bureau and the Narcotics
Control Bureau under the Ministry of Finance, Government of India, for C
filing of complaints relating to an offence under the Act before the Special
Courts.

Under Section 41 of the Act a Metropolitan Magistrate or a Magistrate
of the first class or any Magistrate of the second class specially empowered
by the State Government in this behalf, may issue a warrant for the arrest of D
any person whom he has reason to believe to have committed any offence
punishable under Chapter JV, or for the search, whether by day or by night,
of any building, conveyance etc. in which he has reason to believe any
narcotic drug or psychotropic substance in respect of which an offence
punishable under Chapter IV has been committed or any document or other
article which may furnish evidence of the commission of such offence is kept E
or concealed. Sub-section (2) of Section 41 provides as follows :-

"41. Power to issue warrant and authorization.
(I) .....

(2) · Any such officer of gazetted rank of the departments of central F
excise, narcotics, customs, revenue intelligence or any other
department of the Central Government or of the Border Security
Force as is empowered in this behalf by general or special order
by the Central Government, or any such officer of the revenue,
drugs control, excise, police or any other department of a State G
Government as is empowered in this behalf by general or special
order of the State Government, if he has reason to believe fi'om
personal knowledge or information given by any person and taken
in writing that any person has committed an offence punishable
under Chapter IV or that any narcotic drug, or psychotropic H
substance in respect of which any offence punishable under
1004 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2003) I S.C.R.

A Chapter IV has been committed or any document or other article
which may furnish evidence of the commission of such offence
has been kept or concealed in any building, conveyance or place,
may authorize any officer subordinate to him but superior in rank
to a peon, sepoy or a constable, to arrest such a person or search
a building, conveyance or place, whether by day or by night, or
B himself arrest a person or search a building, conveyance or place."

Section 42 which provides for power of entry, search, seizure and
arrest without warrant or authorization is in similar terms and the officers
who may be authorized must be any such officer (being an officer superior
C in rank to a peon, sepoy or constable) of the Departments of the Central
Excise, Narcotics, Customs, Revenue Intelligence or any other department of
the Central Government or of the Border Security Force as is empowered in
this behalf by general or special order by the Central Government. Section
42(1) is reproduced below for ready reference :-

"42. Power of entry, search, seizure and arrest without warrant or
D
authorization. (I) Any such officer (being an officer superior in rank
to a peon; sepoy or constable) of the departments of central excise,
narcotics, customs, revenue intelligence or any other department of
the Central Government or of the Border Security Force as is
empowered in this behalf by general or special order by the Central
E Government, or any such officer (being an officer superior in rank to
a peon, sepoy or constable) of the revenue, drugs control, excise,
police or any other department of a State Government as is empowered
in this behalf by general or special order of the State Government, if
he has reason to believe from personal knowledge or information
. ·p given by any person and taken down in writing, that any narcotic
drug, or psychotropic substance, in respect of which an offence
punishable under Chapter IV has been committed or any document or
other article which may furnish evidence of the commission of such
offence is kept or concealed in any building, conveyance or enclosed
place, may, between sunrise and sunset
G (a) enter into and search any such building, conveyance or place ;
(b) in case of resistance, break open any door and remove any obstacle
to such entry ;
(c) seize such drug or substance and all materials used in the
H manufacture thereof and any other article and any animal or
ST ATE THROUGH NARCOTICS CONTltOL BUREAU o·. KUL WANT SINGH (B.P. SINGH. J.] •J 005

conveyance which he has reason to believe to be liable to A
confiscation under this Act and any document or other article
which he has reason to believe may furnish evidence of the
commission of any offence punishable under Chapter IV relating
to such drug or substance ; and
(d) detain and search, and, if he thinks proper, arrest any person B
whom he has reason to believe to have committed any offence
punishable under Chapter IV relating to such drug or substance:

Provided that if such officer has reason to believe that a search
warrant or authorization cannot be obtained without affording
opportunity for the concealment of evidence or facility for the escape C
of an offender, he may enter and search such building, conveyance
or enclosed place at any time between sun set and sun rise after
recording the grounds of his belief."

Section 53 provides as follows :-
D
"Power to invest officers of certain departments with powers of an
officer-in-charge of a police station - (I) The Central Government,
after consultation with the State Government, may, by notification
published in the Official Gazette, invest any officer of the department
of central excise~ narcotics~ customs, revenue intelligence or Border __
Security Force or any class of such officers with the powers of an E
officer-in-charge of a police station for the investigation of the offences
under this Act.

(2) The State Government may, by notification published in the Official
Gazette, invest any officer of the department of drugs control, revenue

- or excise or any class of such officers with the powers of an officer-
in-charge of a police station for the investigation of offences under
this Act",

Section 67 of the Act provides that any officer referred to in Section
42, who is authorized in this behalf by the Central Government or the State
F

Government may, during the course of any enquiry in connection with the G
contravention of any provision of the Act, call for information from any
person for the purpose of satisfying himself whether there has been any
contravention of the provisions of the Act or any rule or order made thereunder
and may require any person to produce or deliver any document or thing
useful or relevant to the enquiry or examine any person acquainted with the H
SUPREME COURT REPORTS rio03] I S.C.R.

A facts and circumstances of the case.

It is not in dispute that the Government of India through the Ministry +
of Finance (Department of Revenue) issued three Notifications, all on the I st
November, 1986, modifying the earlier Notifications issued by the Government
of India on 14th November, 1985 b) including therein the Narcotics Control
B Bureau so as to confer powers on the officers of the said Bureau above the
rank of Inspector to exercise the powers and perform the duties specified in
Sections 41 (2), 42( I) 67 and Section 53 of the Act. Thus there is no dispute ~
factually that the Government of India has issued Notifications empowering
the officers of the Narcotics Control Bureau above the rank of Inspector to
C exercise the powers under Sections 41 (2), 42( I), 67 and 53 of the Act.

The case of the respondent is that these Notifications which purport to
vest such powers in the officers of the NCB are invalid and illegal for the
reason that the NCB being a creature of the statute, it cannot be termed as
a department of the Government. The High Court has described the NCB as
D a "creature of the statute". Secondly, it has been urged before us as was
urged before the High Court, that the NCB could only perform the functions
enumerated in the notification constituting the NCB. Since these functions do
not include the functions enumerated in Section 4(2)(e) of the Act, the power
of the NCB to exercise those functions could not be enlarged by issuance of
Notifications under Sections 41, 42, 53 or 67 of the Act as that would be
E violative of Section 4 of the Act under which the NCB was constituted.

At the threshold we may consider the legal status of the NCB. The
Delhi High Court in its impugned judgment has described it as a "creature
of the statute" meaning thereby that it is a "statutory authority". The High
F Court of Karnataka in its impugned judgment has taken the view that it is not
a "statutory authority" since it is not created or constituted by the Act, but
by the Central Government which has been vested with the discretion under
the Act to constitute such an authority. Moreover, the NCB has no independent
functional or autonomous existence.

G Having regard to the provisions of the Act we are inclined to agree
with the view of the Kamataka High Court. Section 4( I) of the Act does not
create the Narcotics Control Bureau. It only authorizes the Central Government
to take all such measures as it deems necessary or expedient for the purpose
of preventing and combating abuse of narcotic drugs and psychotropic -<"""',
substances and the illicit traffic therein. Sub-section 2 of Section 4 enumerates
H only some of the measures which the Central Government may take. Sub-.
STATE THROUGH NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU r. KULWANT SINGH fB.P SINGH. 1.J J 007

section 3 e1npowers and enables the Central Government in its discretion to A
constitute an authority or a hierarchy of authorities for taking n1easures \\·ith
respect to such of the matters referred to in sub section 2. as 1nay be n1entioned
in the order. The order constituting the authority is required to be published
in the Official Gazette. It is therefore apparent on a mere perusal of Section
4 that the Act does not itself create an authority. but empowers the Central B
Govern111ent to do so in its discretion. The authority envisaged by the Section
is constituted by the exercise of executive power by the Central Government
which notifies its order constituting the authority by publishing the same in
the Official Gazette enumerating the powers and functions to be exercised by
it, subject to the supervision and control of the Central Government. Thus,
the authority is not constituted by the Act, but is constituted by the Central C
Government by exercise of executive discretion vested in it by the Act. The
NCB is therefore not an authority created or constituted by the Act, but an
authority created under the Act.

Moreover, unlike statutory authorities created by an Act of the legislature,
the NCB is not a body corporate having perpetual succession and a common D
seal, with power to acquire, hold and dispose of property and capable of
suing or being sued. It is clearly not a distinct legal entity. The notified order
constituting the NCB makes this abundantly clear by providing that the NCB
shall be headed by a Director General who will be assisted at the Headquarters
and in the Zonal Offices. by such officers as may be appointed by the Central
Government from time to time. The powers and functions that it is authorized E
to exercise are such of the powers and functions of the Central Govern1nent
which are enumerated in the order constituting it, and that too subject to the
supervision and control of the Central Government.

The next question that arises for consideration is whether the NCB is F
a department of the Central Government. We have already noticed Sections
41 and 42, which enable the Central Government to empower officers of the
departments named therein, or any other department of the Central
Government, to exercise the powers of entry, search, seizure and arrest under
those provisions. Section 36A(l)(d) authorizes the Special Courts to take
cognizance of offences under the Act on the basis of a police report or upon G
the complaint "made by an officer of the Central Government". The Delhi
High Court has held that the NCB being the creature of a statute is not a
department of the Government. The Karnataka High Court has taken the
contrary view.

The word 'department' by its very nature, is •not capable of a precise H
1008 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2003) I S.C.R.

·A definition. Given_ its ordinary meaning in the context of governmental ,,i
functions, it connotes a branch or division of government administration. For
the sake of convenience the Government work is divided subject wise or {.-
function wise, and each such division may be called a department. The word
"department'' is capable of a wider meaning as also a narrower meaning. The
B meaning of the word may differ having regard to the context in which it is
used. Rule 2 of the Government of India (Allocation of Business) Rules
provides "The business of the Government of India shall be transacted in the
Ministries, Departments, Secretariats and Offices specified in the First Schedule
to these rules (all which are hereinafter referred to as "departments")".

C In the absence of any precise definition of the word 'department' it
must be given its natural and ordinary meaning, unless the legal context in
which the word is used requires a different meaning.

The office memorandum of the Government of India dated 2.2.87 +
clarified that the Director General, NCB, under the over all supervision of the
D Revenue Secretary will be responsible for devising and undertaking
programmes for strengthening and modernizing the Narcotics Intelligence
Agencies in the country. As earlier noticed, the Director General is assisted
by such officers as may be appointed by the Central Government from time
to time. The Director General, NCB has also been declared by the President
E as the Head of Department for the purpose of exercising financial powers in
respect of NCB. It is also brought to our notice that the President of India in
exercise of powers conferred by the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution
of India has framed the Department of Revenue (Narcotics Control Bureau)
(Group C and Group D posts) Recruitment Rules 1992, and Department of
Revenue Narcotics Central Bureau (Intelligence Officers) Recruitment Rules
F 1996. All this leads us to conclude that the NCB is merely a wing or branch
of the Department of Revenue of the Government 9f India. As we have held
earlier, it is not constituted as a distinct legal entity, and therefore has no
independent existence, except as a branch or wing of the Department of
Revenue dealing with matters entrusted to it by the notified order constituting
G it. Therefore, the notifications empowering the officers to exercise the powers
under Sections 36A, 41, 42 and 67 must be held to be legal and valid. The
search and seizure carried out by such officers and the arrests made by them
in exercise of such power is authorized and warranted. The complaint lodged
by the empowered officer under Section 36A(l)(d) is also authorized. The
view that we have taken is supported in principle by the decision of this
H Court in State of Punjab and Ors. v. Raja Ram and Ors., [I 981] 2 SCC 66.
STATE THROUGH NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU r. KUL\\·'ANl SINGH [13.P. SINGH. J.J } 009

We may at this stage deal with the sub111ission \Vhich found favour \Vith A
the High Court of Delhi. that the notification constituting the NCB having
excluded the functions under Section 4{C)(e) of the Act. the power of NCB
could not be enlarged by subordinate legislation by issuance of notification
under the Act e1npowering officers of NCB to exercise the powers of entry,
search, seizure and arrest. The subn1ission is that these notifications vest in
the officers of NCB authoriry to do that which the NCB under its charter B
cannot do.

The submission of course proceeds the basis that NCB is not a
department of the Government of India. Once it is held, as we have held, that
NCB is a wing or branch of the Department of Revenue, the submission must C
fail since the relevant provisions authorize the empo\verment of officers of
any department of the Government of India.

Even otherwise the submission has no force. The Notifications issued
under Sections 36A, 41, 42 and 67 are not intended to enlarge the powers and
jurisdiction conferred on the NCB by the notified order dated 17th March, D
1986 constituting the NCB. lfthe Government intended to enlarge the powers
or jurisdiction ofNCB all that it had to do was to issue a similar Notification
enlarging its powers and jurisdiction and notifying the same by publishing it
in the official gazette. By the issuance of the aforesaid Notifications, the
Government has only authorized a class of its officials in various departments
of the Government including the Department of Revenue of which the NCB E
is a \Ying or branch to exercise povvers under the aforesaid sections. A statutory
duty has been cast on the Central Government to take all such measures as
it deems necessary or expedient for the purpose of preventing and combating
abuse of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances and the illicit traffic
therein. Obviously the Cegtral Government must act in discharge of the F
legislative mandate effectively and to do so it must necessarily act through
its officers. The provisions of the Act, as we have noticed earlier, authorized
the Central Government to empower such officers to exercise powers under
various provisions of the Act. Since the Act itself confers such an authority
on the Central Government, no exception can be taken to the exercise of such
authority. By so empowering its officers, the Central Government purports to G
effectively perform the obligations cast upon it by law. The mere fact that
some of the officers of the NCB are also authorized to exercise such powers
does not amount to enlarging the powers and jurisdiction of the NCB as
conferred on it by the notified order of the Central Government dated 17th
March, 1986.
H
JOJO SUPREME COURT REPORTS P003] 1 S.C.R.

A This Court in Jasbir Singh v. Vipin Kumar Jaggi and Ors .. [200 I] 8
sec 289 expressed a similar view when it observed :- +
""24. Under Section 4( I) of the Act, the Central Government is obli'ged
to take all such measures as are deemed necessary for the purpose of
preventing and combating the abuse of narcotic drugs and psychotropic
B substances and the illicit traffic therein. By Notification SO No. 96(E)
dated 17-3-1985, the Central Government constituted the Narcotics
Control Bureau (NCB) in exercise of its powers under Section 4(3)
of the Act to discharge the powers and functions of the Central
Government under the Act subject to the superintendence and control

c of the Central Government.

25. It is, in the circumstances, clear that when cases are started on the
complaint of NCB, it is not a mere complainant but is the executive
and it must act in discharge of a mandate statutorily cast upon it to
effectively check among other activities, the illegal dissemination
and smuggling of drugs."
D
It was faintly submitted before us that under Section 53 of the Act the
Central Government could not invest any officer of the Department of Revenue
including the NCB with the powers of an Officer In-charge of the Police
Station for investigation of the offences under the Act. It is not necessary for
E us to go into that question because in the instant case cognizance was taken
on the basis of a complaint lodged by an empowered officer and not on the
basis of a police report.

In the result we find that the judgment and order of the High Court of
Delhi in Criminal Appeal No. 248of1997 is wholly unsustainable and deserves
F to be set aside. We accordingly allow Criminal Appeal No. 1139 of 2000, set
~-
aside the impugned judgment and order of the High Court of Delhi dated
I 3th December, 2000 and remit !he matter to the High Court for its disposal
on merits, in accordance with law.

In Criminal Appeal arising out ofSLP (Crl.) No. 3816 of2002 we find
G no merit and the same is accordingly dismissed.

N.J. Appeals disposed of.