A STUDY OF DRUG POLICIES IN INDIA: A CRITICAL LEGAL AND POLICY ANALYSIS OF PROHIBITION, DEMAND REDUCTION, TREATMENT, HARM REDUCTION AND EMERGING NARCOTICS CONTROL
Lavanya P, BCA., LL.B. LL.M (Criminal Law with Cyber Crime), Assistant Professor, Bharath Institute of Law
Revathy P, B.Com., LL.B., LL.M (Property Law), The TamilNadu Dr. Ambedkar Government Law College, Pattarai Perumbuhur
India’s drug policy combines prohibition, criminal enforcement, regulation of legitimate medicines, public-health intervention and international cooperation. Its central legal framework is anchored in Article 47 of the Constitution and the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act 1985 (NDPS Act), supplemented by the Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act 1988 and executive programmes for prevention, treatment and rehabilitation. Adopting a doctrinal and policy-analysis methodology, this article examines legislation, judicial decisions, government policy documents, official reports and relevant international standards to evaluate the evolution and operation of Indian drug policy. It analyses the NDPS framework, treatment and harm-reduction measures, the National Action Plan for Drug Demand Reduction, the Nasha Mukt Bharat Abhiyaan, the Narco-Coordination Centre (NCORD) mechanism, and responses to synthetic drugs, precursor diversion, darknet-enabled trafficking and financial investigation. Particular attention is given to the Vision Document on Narcotics Control 2026–2029 and Tamil Nadu’s Drug-Free Tamil Nadu initiatives, including its Mission Management Unit, Anti-Drug Clubs, treatment interventions and inter-agency coordination. The analysis finds that the principal deficiencies increasingly concern implementation, coordination, treatment accessibility and reliable national and state-level data rather than the absence of a statutory framework. Accordingly, drug-policy effectiveness should be assessed not solely through seizures, arrests and convictions, but also through treatment access and retention, prevention outcomes, reduction in stigma, procedural safeguards and rehabilitation outcomes. The article recommends periodic prevalence surveys, outcome-based evaluation, stronger treatment-diversion and referral pathways, minimum standards for de-addiction services, improved inter-agency and financial investigations, and enhanced capacity to address synthetic drugs and technology-enabled trafficking.
| 📄 Type | 🔍 Information |
|---|---|
| Research Paper | LawFoyer International Journal of Doctrinal Legal Research (LIJDLR), Volume 4, Issue 3, Page 1866–1890. |
| 🔗 Creative Commons | © Copyright |
| This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License . | © Authors, 2026. All rights reserved. |