CRIMINALISATION VS. REHABILITATION: A DOCTRINAL STUDY OF INDIAN DRUG LAWS AND HUMAN RIGHTS JURISPRUDENCE

Drug abuse in India poses a complex challenge at the intersection of public health, criminal justice, and human rights. Traditionally addressed through punitive legal frameworks, particularly the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act), drug dependence continues to be treated as a criminal offence rather than a health condition. This doctrinal legal research critically analyses the NDPS Act and its compatibility with constitutional guarantees such as the right to life and dignity (Article 21), equality before law (Article 14), and freedom of expression and lifestyle autonomy (Article 19). Relying on judicial precedents and international human rights instruments like the UDHR, ICCPR, and ICESCR, the paper highlights how the current legal regime disproportionately targets marginalised communities and criminalises vulnerable individuals without adequate access to health services or legal aid. Landmark judgments such as Puttaswamy, Sunil Batra, and Francis Coralie Mullin are examined to assert that punitive incarceration of drug users often violates the principle of proportionality and human dignity. The study argues for a paradigm shift from punishment to rehabilitation through a rights-based, therapeutic, and restorative legal framework. Recommendations include amending the NDPS Act, promoting harm-reduction policies, and integrating health-based alternatives into the criminal justice system. Ultimately, the paper calls for reimagining addiction not as a crime, but as a public health and human rights issue deserving empathy, care, and constitutional protection. The law must evolve from being an instrument of control to a vehicle of healing and justice in alignment with India's democratic and constitutional ethos.