Back
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Tapabrata Chakraborty, Reetobroto Kumar Mitra
Jahanara Bibi @ Jahanara Begam @ Jahanara Mondal @ Janu – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Reetobroto Kumar Mitra, J.
1. This Writ Petition has been filed seeking a Writ of Habeas Corpus upon setting aside, cancelling, withdrawing and/or quashing the detention order dated 5th September, 2024 passed by the Detaining Authority, Joint Secretary under the Prevention of Illicit Trafficking in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act of 1988 (hereinafter referred to as PIT-NDPS) directing that the petitioner be detained and kept in Loknayak Jayaprakash Narayan Central Jail, Hazaribagh, Jharkhand (hereinafter referred to as the said Jail) to prevent the petitioner’s participation in any further illicit activity and in public interest. The petitioner has been found to be a habitual offender and threat to innocent persons such that her activities are prejudicial and detrimental to the society.
2. The facts leading to the order of 5th September, 2024 are clear and unequivocal. The petitioner had been arrested on account of three cases as under:-
i. FIR No. 3 of 2020 pending before City Sessions Court, Calcutta, in which the petitioner was granted bail on 11th December, 2020. (1.01 Kg of heroin)
ii. NCB Case No. 19 of 2023 whereby petitioner was granted bail on 9th May,
Preventive detention requires strict justification and cannot be enacted merely on apprehension of future crimes, especially when bail has previously been granted.
Preventive detention quashed for lack of subjective satisfaction: 8-year gap between cases, acquittal in one, incidental recovery during warrant execution fail to establish live proximate link to pub....
Preventive detention must be based on current threats and not solely on past conduct; reliance on stale incidents undermines legality.
Preventive detention requires a live link between alleged activities and the detention order; unreasonable delays can invalidate such orders.
The importance of subjective satisfaction in detention matters and the limitations of judicial review.
Preventive detention laws can be invoked even when criminal proceedings are ongoing, and activities deemed prejudicial to public order can warrant detention under the law.
Preventive detention requires strict compliance with statutory safeguards and justifications for delay, ensuring protection against arbitrary deprivation of liberty.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
