Special trial procedure under narcotics law overrides warrant-case procedure in the Code for complaint-based prosecutions.

Where the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 provides a special trial mechanism, including trial by a Court of Session in the absence of a Special Court and cognizance on a complaint by an authorised officer, that procedure prevails over the general Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The overriding non obstante clause and the Act's self-contained scheme exclude the warrant-case procedure for cases instituted otherwise than on police report under Chapter XIX of the Code. The objection to proceeding under the Act's special procedure was rejected, and the request to apply Sections 244 to 247 of the Code failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether a prosecution under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, initiated on a complaint by an authorised Intelligence Officer and triable by the Court of Session in the absence of a Special Court, is governed by the procedure for warrant cases instituted otherwise than on police report under Sections 244 to 247 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Analysis: The statutory scheme of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 provides for trial by a Special Court, and during the period when no Special Court is constituted, the offence is to be tried by a Court of Session. The Act further provides that, for proceedings before a Special Court, the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 applies only save as otherwise provided in the Act, and the Special Court is deemed to be a Court of Session. The Act also authorises cognizance on a complaint by an empowered officer without commitment for trial. In view of this special procedure and the overriding effect of the non obstante clause, the procedure applicable to warrant cases instituted otherwise than on police report under Chapter XIX of the Code has no application to such trials under the Act.

Conclusion: The request to apply Sections 244 to 247 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was rightly rejected, and the objection to proceeding under the special procedure of the Act failed.

Final Conclusion: The revision was dismissed because prosecutions under the Act are to proceed under the special trial mechanism prescribed by that Act, not under the ordinary warrant-case procedure in the Code.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a special statute creates a self-contained trial mechanism and gives it overriding effect, the general warrant-case procedure in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 does not apply unless the special statute so provides.

---