JUDGMENT :

MANISHA BATRA, J.

1. The instant petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari for quashing the order dated 14.07.2025 (Annexure P-8), passed by respondent No. 1-Secretary to Govt. of Haryana, Home Department, whereby the petitioner was ordered to be detained, and also for quashing of order dated 15.09.2025 (Annexure P-9), whereby the detention of the petitioner was confirmed for six months by the said respondent.

2. Brief facts relevant for the purpose of disposal of this petition are that the petitioner was involved in five cases, registered against him. All of these cases had been registered against him under the provisions of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short ‘NDPS Act’) involving non-commercial quantities of the contrabands. He had been granted concession of regular bail in all of those cases. Respondent No. 4-Superintendent of Police, Dabwali wrote a letter on 21.03.2025 to respondent No. 3-Director General of Police, Haryana State Narcotics Control Bureau requesting him to detain the petitioner on the ground that he was still involved in selling of narcotic substances. The said letter was forwarded to respondent No. 2-Director General of Police, Haryana for obtaining order under the Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1988 (for short ‘PITNDPS Act’). Thereafter, respondent No. 1, while acting upon the proposal sent by respondent No. 2, had ordered for detention of order, vide impugned order dated 14.07.2025. The petitioner was accordingly detained on 05.08.2025. Then, vide impugned order dated 15.09.2025, respondent No. 2 had confirmed detention order of the petitioner and the petitioner was ordered to be kept in detention for a period of six months. Aggrieved from the same, the petitioner has filed the present petition.

3. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that the impugned detention order dated 14.07.2025 and the confirmation order dated 15.09.2025 are arbitrary, illegal and violative of the fundamental right to personal liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India as the petitioner was already on regular bail in all the five cases registered against him under the NDPS Act, each involving non-commercial quantity. There existed no compelling necessity warranting recourse to the extraordinary power of preventive detention against the petitioner. While passing the detaining orders, the respondent-authority had mechanically relied upon the pendency of criminal cases without recording any cogent satisfaction as to why the conditions of bail imposed by the competent Courts were insufficient to prevent the alleged activities. It is further argued that the failure to consider the efficacy of bail conditions vitiates the subjective satisfaction and renders the detention order unsustainable. The alleged involvement of the petitioner in cases relating to non-commercial quantities under the NDPS Act, by itself, does not constitute a threat to public order so as to justify preventive detention under the PITNDPS Act, particularly when no fresh material or proximate incident has been brought on record to demonstrate any imminent danger or continuing prejudicial activity. The impugned action, therefore, amounts to using preventive detention as a substitute for ordinary criminal law, which is impermissible in law and results in unreasonable and disproportionate curtailment of the personal liberty of the petitioner. The petitioner is in detention since 05.08.2025. His continued detention is a clear abuse of statutory power, which suffers from non-application of mind and violates the constitutional mandate of fairness, reasonableness and due process under Article 21, warranting interference by this Hon’ble Court. Hence, it is urged that the petition deserves to be allowed and the impugned orders are liable to be quashed