JUDGMENT :

RAHUL BHARTI, J.

01. Heard learned counsel for both sides.

02. Perused the writ petition and the annexures therewith and also the counter affidavit filed in response.

03. The detention record produced also scanned thoroughly.

04. The institution of this writ petition came to take place on 27.10.2025 by the petitioner-Mohammad Yousuf Teeli acting through his brother Mudsar Ahmad Teeli coming forward to earn a writ of habeas corpus from this Court for the purpose of seeking restoration of his personal liberty otherwise lost to preventive detention custody effected and inflicted under the Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1988 (in short “PIT NDPS Act, 1988”).

05. The respondent No. 3 – Sr. Superintendent of Police (SSP), Anantnag approached the respondent No. 2 – Divisional Commissioner, Kashmir with a dossier accompanying letter No. CS/71/2025/17737-42 dated 16.09.2025 through the medium of which the alleged state of activities of the petitioner falling within the scope of mischief of PIT NDPS Act, 1988 were reported and the petitioner’s preventive detention was solicited so as to deter him from continuing with his alleged state of activities.

06. In his dossier, the respondent No. 3 – Sr. Superintendent of Police (SSP), Anantnag referred the petitioner a 5^th class drop out and thereafter engaging himself in domestic work/farming and in the course of time getting indulged in illegal activities of drug trade with sale and purchase of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances among the Youth. The adverse antecedents of the petitioner in this respect were drawn out from FIR No. 40/2025 registered by the Police Station Srigufwara under sections 8/15 of the NDPS Act, 1985.

07. It is only that sole FIR and the criminal case borne out of that the petitioner was reckoned to be a case to be booked under PIT NDPS Act, 1988.

08. The dossier refers to the fact that the petitioner is on bail in connection with said criminal case in which connection cancellation of bail is being contemplated by the District Police but, nevertheless, as per continuous field reports, the petitioner is alleged to have indulged in similar activities (drug peddling) in the area, therefore, making a case for seeking his preventive detention.

09. Acting upon said dossier, the respondent No. 2 – Divisional Commissioner, Kashmir came up with “Grounds of Dossier” and on basis thereof passed the preventive detention Order No. DIVCOM-“K”/156/2025 dated 03.10.2025 thereby directing imposition of preventive detention upon the petitioner and his confinement in the District Jail, Poonch for a period to be specified by the Govt./Advisory Board.

10. The issuance of detention order resulted in issuance of a warrant of arrest which came to be executed by PSI Danyal Ahmad Anwar, PID No. GEC-246880 of the Police Station Srigufwara on 07.10.2025 who handed over the person of the petitioner to the Superintendent District Jail, Poonch.

11. The petitioner is said to have been explained 41 leaves compilation related to the detention order making him understand that the petitioner has a right to make a representation to the Govt. as well as the detaining authority against his detention order.

12. It is in this state of preventive detention custody that the petitioner had come forward with the institution of the present writ petition, after expiry of period of 20 days of detention custody, on 27.10.2025 before this Court challenging his detention on the basis of the grounds as set out in para 6.

13. By virtue of a written representation dated 17.10.2025 addressed to the respondent No. 2 – Divisional Commissioner, Kashmir and submitted against receipt No. E- 7483203 dated 18.10.2025, the petitioner solicited revocation of his detention order.

14. In the grounds of challenge set out in para 6, the petitioner has come forth stating that exercise of jurisdiction under PIT NDPS Act, 1988 against him is bad and arbitrary without application of mind on