When Bengaluru police fanned out across colleges and hostels on March 4 to collect urine samples from students as part of a drug screening drive, more than 1,200 young people were asked to undergo the tests. The operation identified 31 positive cases. However, even as authorities say the exercise was meant to steer youth away from drugs, the manner in which the screening was conducted has raised questions about its legality.
The inspections were carried out in Vijaynagara sub-division and overseen by Deputy Commissioner of Police, Bengaluru West, Yatheesh N, under the Karnataka Police’s Sanmitra initiative. The programme aims “to prevent youth from falling into drug use and to guide those who may require support.” The police said that the identities and family details of the individuals tested will be kept strictly confidential.
Sanmitra (good friend) drive aims to adopt a compassionate and reform-orientated approach to tackling drug addiction among youth. Under the initiative, police also plan to assign dedicated personnel to provide guidance and support to individuals affected by addiction as part of efforts to help them reform and move towards a drug-free life.
According to a press release issued by the police, urine samples were collected from more than 1,200 students during checks conducted in six educational institutions and two hostels. Officers and staff from local police stations were involved in the exercise, along with doctors, technicians and medical staff from nearby hospitals including Punya Hospital, Padmadevayya Hospital, KADE Hospital, Sharavathi Hospital, Sri Lakshmi Multi-Speciality Hospital and Kangaroo Care Hospital.
Of the collected samples, 585 were randomly tested, and 31 were found to be positive. Authorities said counselling with mental health professionals and necessary medical support will be arranged for those who require assistance.
Though the police claim that the drive was conducted with the consent and after obtaining no-objection certificates from the managements of the institutions and hostels, Rahul Machaiah, a lawyer based in Karnataka, said that random drug testing by police without the consent of the person is not recognised under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (NDPS).
In India, the NDPS Act deals with the production, possession, sale, transport, and consumption of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances.
“Under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), medical examination is permitted only after a person has been arrested in connection with a crime,” he said and added, “Even if consent is obtained, the quality of that consent is questionable under the law.”
He further pointed out the landmark KS Puttaswamy vs Union of India case, in which the apex court declared the right to privacy a fundamental right. “The Supreme Court has recognised bodily privacy as a fundamental right. It can be curtailed only in accordance with law, and only if the curtailment is absolutely essential,” he said.
He explained that the law permits the collection of bodily samples only from an arrested person in connection with a formally registered case where investigators have reason to believe the sample is necessary for the investigation. He further noted that provisions under the Motor Vehicles Act allow surprise checks for alcohol or drug consumption “only when a person is driving a vehicle.”
Stating that the “good intentions” of the police do not relieve them of the duty to comply with the law, especially when bodily privacy is involved, Rahul said, “On a practical note, it can lead to extortion and other forms of harassment once the cops know that a person is using drugs.”
When asked how the police will proceed further, DCP West Yatheesh assured that cases will not be taken up against the 31 students who tested positive, but they will be offered help. “We will counsel them and see if they disclose who supplied the drugs. Our focus is to go after the peddlers,” he said.