Home  /  Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985  /  Section 69

Section 69: Protection of action taken in good faith

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 • Official Statutory Text & Practice Guide

Statutory Regulation
Legal Standard
Competent Court / Tribunal
Act 1985
Section 68 All 83 Sections of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 Section 70

Legal Commentary & Landmark Judgments: Section 69

Section 69 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 enacts an express statutory indemnity protecting the Central Government, State Governments, and all officers or authorized persons exercising powers or performing duties under the Act from civil suits, criminal prosecutions, and other legal proceedings for anything done or intended to be done in good faith. Essential for enabling frontline enforcement personnel to execute high-risk raids, searches, and interdictions without constant fear of vexatious retaliatory litigation, Section 69 immunity is strictly conditioned upon 'good faith' as defined in general criminal jurisprudence, leaving corrupt, reckless, and intentionally illegal acts fully exposed to legal accountability.

  • Comprehensive Subject-Matter Immunity: Section 69 directs that 'no suit, prosecution or other legal proceeding shall lie against the Central Government, or a State Government, or any officer of the Central Government, or of the State Government or any other person... for anything in good faith done or intended to be done under this Act or any rule or order made thereunder.' It covers both civil damages and criminal liability.
  • The Sine Qua Non of 'Good Faith': Immunity is contingent on 'good faith'. Under Section 52 of the Indian Penal Code (Section 2(11) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023), nothing is said to be done in 'good faith' which is done without due care and attention. If an officer fabricates evidence, violates mandatory Section 50 safeguards willfully, plants contraband, or detains a suspect maliciously, the shield of Section 69 collapses completely.
  • Boundary Between Section 58 Liability and Section 69 Protection: Section 69 must be harmonized with Section 58 (which criminalizes vexatious entry, search, seizure, or arrest). Where an action falls under Section 58 or constitutes a flagrant breach of fundamental rights under Article 21, Section 69 provides no defense against constitutional tort compensation or criminal prosecution backed by Section 59(3) sanction.
Key Landmark Precedents:
  • State of Punjab v. Balbir Singh (1994) 3 SCC 299: The Supreme Court clarified that while officers are protected for actions taken in good faith, they cannot disregard statutory safeguards with impunity; intentional or reckless non-compliance with statutory search mandates negates good faith.
  • D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal (1997) 1 SCC 416: The Supreme Court held that sovereign immunity or statutory protection clauses cannot shield the State or its officers from constitutional liability under Article 32/226 to pay compensation for custodial violence, unlawful detention, or flagrant violations of fundamental rights.
Courtroom Practice & Strategic Litigation Guidance:

In defense practice, when seeking to prosecute an investigating officer or claim damages for a malicious NDPS prosecution following an honorable acquittal: (1) Rebut 'good faith' by demonstrating absence of 'due care and attention'—e.g., failure to record Section 42 reasons, complete absence of independent witnesses, or suppression of exculpatory video footage; (2) File a writ petition under Article 226 for constitutional damages rather than a civil suit, as constitutional tort bypasses Section 69 immunity.

Section 68 All 83 Sections of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 Section 70