P.D.Dinakaran, J.: The petitioner is the wife of one Murugan alias Mottai Murugan (hereinafter referred to as “the detenu”), who was ordered to be detained by an order dated 22.7.2004 of the first respondent herein branding him as a Drug Offender under Sec.3(1) of the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Drug Offenders, Forest Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders and Slum Grabbers Act, 1982 (for brevity the “Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982”), of course based on a ground case said to have taken place on 9.7.2004 at 7.00 a.m. when the police party, on the information of their informant, caught hold of the detenu and found the detenu holding a yellow colour bag. When the bag was opened it was found that the bag contained an object wrapped up in the newspaper. The newspaper was unfolded and the object was found to be 1 kg. of ganja. The police party, following the procedures, sent two samples of 25 grams each of ganja for chemical examination and the balance of 950 grams of ganja was wrapped in the same newspaper, put in the same yellow bag, tied with twine and a seal was affixed. Thereafter, a case was registered in Crime No.275 of 2004 under Sec.8(c) read with Sec.20(b)(ii)(A) of the Tamil Nadu Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, and the detenu was remanded to judicial custody.

2. The detaining authority also referred to 6 adverse cases registered against the detenu in the impugned order, which are extracted as follows:

(i) Crime No.44 of 2002 on the file of the Virudhunagar West Police Station with reference to the occurrence said to have taken place on 5.2.2002 for alleged illegal possession of 600 gms. of ganja without having any Government licence nor valid permit;

(ii) Crime No.524 of 2002 on the file of the Virudhunagar West Police Station with reference to the occurrence said to have taken place on 24.11.2002 for alleged illegal possession of 250 gms. of ganja without having any Government licence nor valid permit;

(iii) Crime No.108 of 2003 on the file of the Virudhunagar West Police Station with reference to the occurrence said to have taken place on 4.3.2003 for alleged illegal possession of 100 gms. of ganja without having any Government licence nor valid permit;

(iv) Crime No.363 of 2003 on the file of the Virudhunagar West Police Station with reference to the occurrence said to have taken place on 20.7.2003 for alleged illegal possession of 1 Kg. of ganja without having any Government licence nor valid permit;

(v) Crime No.670 of 2003 on the file of the Virudhunagar West Police Station with reference to the occurrence said to have taken place on 26.11.2003 for alleged illegal possession of 100 gms. of ganja without having any Government licence nor valid permit; and

(vi) Crime No.64 of 2004 on the file of the Virudhunagar West Police Station with reference to the occurrence said to have taken place on 14.2.2004 for alleged illegal possession of 100 gms. of ganja without having any Government licence nor valid permit;

3. Mr.G.R.Swaminathan, learned counsel for the petitioner attacks the impugned order of detention on two grounds:

(i) the detaining authority ought not to have invoked the provisions of Tamil Nadu Act (14 of 1982) in view of the Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1988 (for brevity the "P.I.T. N.D.P.S. Act"), which occupies the field of legislation relating to preventive detention, inasmuch as P.I.T. N.D.P.S. Act prevails over the Tamil Nadu Act (14 of 1982), by operation of Art.254 of the Constitution of India; and

(ii) as the offences punishable under the provisions of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 are non-bailable in view of Sec.37 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, there is no imminent possibility of the detenu coming out on bail and therefore, the finding of the detaining authority, that there is imminent possibility of the detenu coming out on bail, suffers from non

Click Here to Read the rest of this document