Three years ago, the Jharkhand Police had intercepted a vehicle and made a sizeable seizure of narcotics. But when it came to producing the material during trial in 2024, the police claimed that the contraband had been consumed by rats while it was stored in the malkhana.However, the sole accused in the drugs case was acquitted by a special NDPS court in Ranchi which flagged various lapses in the investigation, including the investigation officer’s claim that 200 kg of ganga has been eaten by rats.According to the prosecution, Ormanjhi Police in Ranchi district had intercepted a white Bolero vehicle on NH-20 on January 17, 2022, after being tipped-off that narcotics were being transported from Ranchi towards Ramgarh.According to the police, after the vehicle was stopped by the police, three persons jumped out of it and tried to flee. Of them, Indrajeet Rai alias Anarjeet Rai was caught while Vikas Chaurasia and Kundan Rai managed to escape.The police searched the vehicle and claimed to have recovered 200 kg of ganja, packed in around 170 packets, concealed in specially-created compartments.An FIR was then registered under Sections 20(b)(ii)(c) and 22(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act. Later, Rai was arrested in January 2022, and remained in custody during the trial.In an order dated December 19, 2025, Additional Judicial Commissioner-III-cum-Special Judge Anand Prakash acquitted Indrajeet Rai, and held that the prosecution had failed to prove the charges beyond a reasonable doubt. The court also raised doubts over the seizure and handling of the narcotics substance.Story continues below this adReferring to a station diary entry stating that the seized ganja was destroyed by rodents, the court observed in its judgment, “This casts a suspicion on the very seizure of the case and its handling by the police.”According to the order, Rai told the police that the ganja packets belonged to Vikash Chourasia and Kundan Rai, who ran away, and that under their direction, he was transporting the substance to Bakhtiyarpur in Bihar.However, while examining the seven prosecution witnesses—all police personnel—the court found multiple contradictions in their testimonies on key aspects such as the time of interception of the vehicle, the exact location of the drug seizure, who apprehended the accused, and the direction in which the other two accused had fled.“There are several contradictions in their statements… which casts a doubt whether the alleged accused was caught at the place as stated by the prosecution or from somewhere else,” the court noted in its order.Story continues below this adThe court also took note of the fact that no independent public witness was examined, despite the alleged seizure taking place on a busy national highway with residential areas nearby.The prosecution has also failed to establish any link between the accused and the seized vehicle, the order said. “No other paper of the vehicle has been brought before the court which could show that the vehicle was in any way associated with the accused,” the judgment read.The Investigating Officer (IO) of the case admitted during cross-examination that the vehicle allegedly seized did not have an engine or chassis number—a fact that was neither properly recorded in the case diary nor reported to transport authorities, further weakening the prosecution case, the court said.A key blow to the prosecution’s case came from its own admission that the seized contraband, stored in the police malkhana, was eaten by rats. A station diary entry to this effect was produced in court in February 2024 shortly before the material was required to be produced during trial.Story continues below this adThe court also pointed out serious gaps in sampling, sealing and preservation of evidence with several witnesses unable to clearly state when samples were drawn or how they were marked.Holding that the prosecution had failed to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt, the court acquitted Indrajeet Rai of all charges. “The prosecution has failed to correlate the accused with the vehicle seized and to prove beyond doubt that the accused was apprehended in the manner and at the place as alleged,” the court held, adding that the accused be released from custody if not wanted in any other case.