Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
A.K. JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, JOBIN SEBASTIAN
Salman Fayis V. S/o Ashraf – Appellant
Versus
State of Kerala – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. arguments on applicant's requirement for preventive detention (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. judicial reasoning for detention validity (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 12) |
| 3. final decision on writ petition (Para 11) |
JUDGMENT :
order" data-para-type="facts" id="1">1. The petitioner herein is the brother of one Safthar Hashmi ('detenu' for the sake of brevity) and his challenge in this Writ Petition is directed against Ext.P2 order of detention dated 11.03.2025 passed by the additional 2nd respondent under Section 3 (1) of the Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (PITNDPS Act for brevity).
order" data-para-type="facts" id="3">3. Altogether, three cases in which the detenu got involved have been considered by the jurisdictional authority for passing the order of detention. Out of the three cases considered, the case registered with respect to the last prejudicial activity is crime No.1193/2024 of Nadakkavu Police Station, alleging the commission of offences punishable under Sections 22 (C) r/w 29 of NDPS Act.
5. Relying on the decision in Kamarunnissa v. Union of India and another, 1991 (1) SCC 128, the learned counsel for the petitioner contended that
A detention order under the PITNDPS Act can be valid if authorities demonstrate imminent likelihood of the detenu's release on bail and the risk of future criminal activity.
Preventive detention may lawfully proceed under specific conditions despite a detenu's judicial custody; it requires proof of potential bail release and risk of recurring criminal conduct.
A detention order under preventive detention laws requires clear evidence of a detenu's potential release on bail and risk of re-offending, which must be stated in the order itself to be valid.
Preventive detention is valid even for individuals in judicial custody if the authority satisfies the triple test regarding bail likelihood and continuing criminal activity, despite delays not severi....
Preventive detention may be valid for individuals in judicial custody if the authority demonstrates a real risk of bail release leading to further illicit activities.
A detention order under the PITNDPS Act is invalid if the authority fails to demonstrate a real possibility of the detenu being released on bail while in judicial custody.
A detention order under the PITNDPS Act can be validly issued while the detenu is in judicial custody, provided the authority demonstrates awareness of this and substantiates the likelihood of bail a....
A detention order under preventive laws is valid for an individual in custody if there is a justified belief of imminent bail release and potential reoffending.
A detention order under the PITNDPS Act can be validly passed even if the detenu is in judicial custody, provided the authority demonstrates a real possibility of bail based on reliable materials.
A detention order under the PITNDPS Act is valid if the authority satisfies three criteria regarding the likelihood of bail, and potential for subsequent prejudicial activity, irrespective of the det....
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
