Home  /  Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985  /  Section 73

Section 73: Bar of jurisdiction

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

Statutory Regulation
Legal Standard
Competent Court / Tribunal
Act 1985
Section 72 All 83 Sections of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 Section 74

Legal Commentary & Landmark Judgments: Section 73

Section 73 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985—which originally enacted a statutory bar precluding civil courts from entertaining any suit or proceeding in respect of anything done or omitted by an officer under the Act—was formally repealed by the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (Amendment) Act, 2014 (Act 16 of 2014) with effect from May 1, 2014. The legislative deletion of Section 73 removed an unnecessary and constitutionally suspect statutory barrier, restoring the general jurisdiction of civil courts under Section 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 to adjudicate civil rights, contract claims, and property disputes arising out of non-penal regulatory actions.

  • Historical Civil Court Bar: Prior to its repeal in 2014, Section 73 declared that no civil court shall have jurisdiction in respect of any matter which the Central Government, State Government, or any officer empowered under the Act was empowered to determine, barring civil litigation against administrative actions under the Act.
  • Legislative Rationale for Repeal by Act 16 of 2014: Parliament repealed Section 73 to align the NDPS Act with established administrative law doctrines: civil court jurisdiction under Section 9 CPC should not be routinely ousted, especially where administrative authorities act without jurisdiction or in violation of fundamental judicial procedures.
  • Contemporary Forum Remedies Post-Repeal: Following the repeal of Section 73, aggrieved parties—such as pharmaceutical companies whose licenses are arbitrarily revoked, or property owners facing wrongful administrative attachments—possess unrestricted access to civil courts under Section 9 CPC for declaratory and injunctive relief, in addition to constitutional writ remedies under Articles 226 and 32.
Key Landmark Precedents:
  • Dhulabhai v. State of Madhya Pradesh AIR 1969 SC 78 (Constitution Bench): The Constitution Bench established the classic principles governing exclusion of civil court jurisdiction, holding that even where a statute contains an express bar, civil courts retain jurisdiction to examine whether statutory provisions have been complied with or whether the tribunal acted in violation of fundamental principles of judicial procedure.
  • Union of India v. Tarachand Gupta & Bros. (1971) 1 SCC 486: The Supreme Court held that an ouster clause does not preclude civil courts from declaring an administrative order null and void if the authority acted ultra vires or exceeded its jurisdictional boundaries.
Courtroom Practice & Strategic Litigation Guidance:

In pharmaceutical and industrial hemp litigation, if prosecuting or regulatory authorities argue that civil courts cannot interfere with NDPS administrative actions, rely on the 2014 repeal of Section 73 to establish that no civil court bar exists today. Under Section 9 CPC, an aggrieved licensee can institute a civil suit for a declaration that a regulatory seizure or cancellation order is void, accompanied by applications for temporary injunction under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 CPC.

Section 72 All 83 Sections of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 Section 74