The Meghalaya High Court on May 26 observed that steps have been taken to ensure that the drug menace does not set deep roots in the State or around the city.
The Division Bench of Chief Justice Sanjib Banerjee and Justice W. Diengdoh disposed of a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by one M. Kharkongor concerning the rise of substance/drug abuse amongst children and adolescents in the State .
It is said by the Court that there is a perception that there may be concerted moves by inimical interests to push drugs and psychotropic substances in the NorthEast, particularly in and around Shillong which attracts tourists and a lot of the younger crowd.
With the assistance of Amicus Curiae and the several meetings conducted with State and private officials at various levels, including the welcome participation of the defence personnel, the need to be on the guard may have been realised by the State administration.
Without going into the details, the Court observed that it is evident that steps have been taken to ensure that the drug menace does not set deep roots in the State or around the city. Both the police and the civil administration have indicated several checks and guards having been put in place and constant monitoring.
“At the end of the day, the object of the exercise by way of a public interest litigation is to make the authorities aware and guide them in taking appropriate steps where some deficiency is noticed.
From the various affidavits and reports filed, it is evident that the State is alive to the problem and that appropriate measures have been or are being put in place to deal with the problem.
Even the Army, Air Force and the paramilitary forces which are present in the State have participated in the meetings and have introduced measures to augment the civilian government’s efforts in such regard.”
The Court held that PIL may have served its purpose for the moment. However, it will be open to any public-spirited individual to bring the matter to the notice of the Court afresh, if the desired measures are not in place or there is any dropping of the guard by the administration, directed by the Court.
“The only additional point that ought to be recorded is for the State to set up an adequate number of rehabilitation centres with appropriate facilities. Many a sad parent in the State with a child who is afflicted with addiction, is now required to look beyond the State for appropriate rehabilitation centres. This should not continue”, the order reads.
While disposing of the PIL the Bench appreciated the Amicus Curiae and Advocates representing the State for going beyond the call of duty to address an issue of great importance.