An Indian court has cleared a man accused of large-scale drug smuggling after police failed to present the seized narcotics as evidence. The case attracted national attention when officers told the court that rats had eaten nearly 200 kilograms of cannabis stored in a police warehouse.
The explanation stunned the court and triggered serious questions about how law enforcement agencies manage evidence in sensitive criminal cases.
The Case That Started With a Highway Interception
The case emerged from Jharkhand, an eastern Indian state. Police registered the case in 2022 after stopping a vehicle on a national highway. During the search, officers claimed they recovered a large quantity of cannabis hidden inside the vehicle.
Investigators described the concealment as sophisticated. Based on this recovery, police arrested the driver and named him the main accused in a narcotics smuggling case. Officials said the seizure ranked among the larger drug recoveries in the region that year.
Police estimated the seized cannabis weighed around 200 kilograms. They placed its market value at roughly 30 million Pakistani rupees. Under Indian law, this quantity falls under the category of a serious narcotics offence.
A Shocking Claim During Court Proceedings
During the trial, the prosecution faced an unexpected challenge. When the court asked police to present the seized cannabis, officers admitted they no longer had it.
Police told the court that they had stored the drugs in a government warehouse. According to their statement, rats infested the storage area and consumed the entire consignment. As a result, police could not produce the drugs or samples before the court.
The judges expressed strong disbelief. They questioned how rodents could destroy such a massive quantity without anyone noticing. The court also asked why officers failed to secure the warehouse or conduct regular inspections.
Court Condemns Police Negligence
The court rejected the police explanation outright. Judges described the situation as a clear example of serious negligence. They stressed that protecting evidence forms one of the most basic responsibilities of the police.
The court noted that drug-related cases rely heavily on physical evidence. Without the seized substance, the prosecution had no foundation to proceed. The judge stated that courts cannot convict individuals based on claims alone.
Because the police failed to preserve or present the evidence, the court acquitted the main accused. The verdict cited the absence of material proof and repeated lapses by the investigating agency.
Legal Standards Under India’s Drug Laws
India prosecutes narcotics cases under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act. The law imposes strict penalties and demands rigorous procedures from investigators.
Courts expect police to store seized drugs in secure facilities. Officers must also maintain clear records, conduct periodic checks, and present the contraband during trial. In many cases, police draw samples for forensic testing, but they must still account for the remaining substance.
Indian courts have dismissed several drug cases in the past due to procedural lapses. Legal experts say this case follows a troubling pattern rather than an isolated failure.
Public Reaction and Online Backlash
After news of the verdict spread, the case sparked intense debate on social media. Many users mocked the claim that rats consumed 200 kilograms of cannabis. Others expressed anger over what they saw as institutional incompetence.
Several commentators questioned whether the explanation concealed deeper issues, such as poor oversight or mismanagement. Although the court did not make such findings, public skepticism remains strong.
The case also fueled broader criticism of storage conditions at police facilities, especially in smaller towns and rural districts.
A Setback for Trust in Law Enforcement
Drug trafficking continues to pose a serious challenge across India. Authorities frequently report major seizures along highways and near state borders. However, failed prosecutions weaken public confidence in these efforts.
When courts dismiss cases due to basic investigative failures, the justice system loses credibility. Experts warn that without better training, infrastructure, and accountability, similar cases may follow.
The Jharkhand verdict now stands as a stark reminder. Effective law enforcement requires more than arrests and claims. It demands careful procedure, secure evidence, and responsibility at every stage of the process.
