The main legal point established in the judgment is the necessity of preventive detention to prevent individuals from engaging in acts prejudicial to public health and welfare, as emphasized by the legal provisions and the court's interpretation.

JUDGMENT :

1. Divisional Commissioner, Jammu, has placed Anil Singh alias Furtila, S/o Madan Singh, R/o Hamirpur, Tehsil Khour, A/P Kodewala, Tehsil Akhnoor, District Jammu, under preventive detention under Section 3 of the Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1988 read with SRO 247 dated 27.07.1988 vide detention Order No. PITNDPS 27 of 2023, dated 10.08.2023.

2. The detention of the detenu has been ordered on the ground that he is a notorious criminal/drug peddler/habitual smuggler engaged in sale and purchase of illicit trafficking in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance which poses a serious threat to the lives of young generation. As per the dossier of the Sr. Superintendent of Police, Jammu, the detenue was involved in FIR No. 248/2021 registered u/s 8/21/29 NDPS Act, 4/25 Arms Act, 184 MV Act at Police Station, Akhnoor and FIR No. 180/2023 registered u/s 8/21/22 NDPS Act at Police Station, Katra.

3. The Detaining Authority, after considering the dossier of activities submitted by the Police, has arrived at its subjective satisfaction to prevent the detenu from further committing any offences and accordingly issued the order of detention.

4. The detenu has assailed the impugned order of detention on the following grounds:

(i) The Detaining Authority has not applied its mind while arriving at its subjective satisfaction with regard to the necessity of placing the detenu under preventive detention.

(ii) That all the documents relied upon by the Detaining Authority have not been provided to him, which has affected his right to make an effective representation.

(iii) The impugned order of detention has been passed on the basis of two FIRs in which the petitioner has already been enlarged on bail.

(iv) The order of detention has been issued under the NDPS Act but the executing authority has executed the same under Section 8(1) of the Public Safety Act.

(v) The grounds of detention verbatim of the police dossier, as such, there is no application of mind by the Detaining Authority, while passing the impugned order of detention.

5. Mr. Amit Gupta, learned AAG, has filed the counter affidavit as well as produced the record. The respondents submit that the detenue has been detained on the dossier supplied by the SSP, Jammu, and the Detaining Authority, after carefully examining the same, has arrived at a subjective satisfaction to detain the detenu for his repeated and continuous involvement in drugs trafficking, which affect the health and welfare of the people. All the statutory requirements and constitutional guarantees have been fulfilled and complied with by the detaining authority. The impugned order issued is legal and valid and the learned counsel for the respondents has further submitted that the grounds urged in this petition by the detenue are misconceived and untenable being without any merit.

6. Heard learned counsel for the parties at length and also perused the record.

7. The right of personal liberty is most precious right, guaranteed under the Constitution. It has been held to be transcendental, inalienable and available to a person independent of the Constitution. A person is not to be deprived of his personal liberty, except in accordance with procedures established under law and the procedure as laid down in “Maneka Gandhi vs. Union of India”, 1978 AIR SC 597, is to be just and fair. The personal liberty may be curtailed, where a person faces a criminal charge or is convicted of an offence and sentenced to imprisonment.

8. Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India, provided for detention of a person without a formal charge and trial and without such person held guilty of an offence and sentenced to imprisonment by a competent court. Its aim and object are to save society from activities that are likely to deprive a large number of people of their right to life and personal liberty.

9. It is well settled that the purpose of the preventive detention by detaining of a person is