1989 Supreme(MP) 40
High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
R. K. VARMA, A. G. QURESHI
RAFIQ MOHAMMAD - Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA - Respondents
M. P. 838 Of 1988
Decided On : 02/01/1989
A.H.KHAN, H.S.OBEROI
Headnote:(1) Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Ordinance, 1988-S. 3 (1)-detention order suffering from defect of non-application of mind-cannot sustain.
The statement made by the detenu which has been relied upon by the detaining authority does not contain any admission that Rameshchandra Patel and Lalit Patel used to give him morphine for selling to customers. Also no material is shown to exist for the allegation that the detenu had in the past sold morphine on behalf of Rameshchandra Patel and Lalit Patel. Therefore, in the instant case the detention order is vitiated as it suffers from the defect of non application of mind by the detaining authority. AIR 1974 SC 1161 followed. [Para 22]
(2) Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Ordinance, 1988-S.3 (1)-National Security Act, 1980-S. 3 (1) -past conduct of detenu under Ordinance may go unnoticed being concealed such is not the position under the Act. AIR 1981 SC 2166 distinguished. [Para 13]
(3) Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Ordinance, 1988-S. 3 (1)-detenu already under detention in connection with offence-order of preventive detention may still be passed against him AIR 1964 SC 334 and AIR 1988 SC 934 followed. [Para 9]
(4) Words and Pharses-word 'engage'-means to involve oneself. [Para 10]
( 1 ) BY this petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner who is the brother of detenu Saleem, has sought quashing of the order of detention dt. 8th July, 1988 (Annexure-'f') passed by the detaining authority, the Joint Secretary to the Government of India, under S. 3 (1) of the Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Ordinance, 1988 (7 of 1988) (hereinafter referred to as 'the Ordinance') whereby the detenu has been detained and kept in custody in the Central Jail. , Indore and has prayed that the detenu be set at liberty.
( 2 ) ON 9th June 1988 acting on prior information, the officers of the Central Narcotics Control Bureau and the Police kept a watch over M/s. Saleem Auto Garage, South Tukoganj, Indore and detected one Rameshchandra Patel handing over a raxine foam bag to the detenu Saleem, the owner of the garage. Another hand bag was found retained by Rameshchandra Patel. The search of the two bags by the officers resulted in the recovery of one kilogram of morphine (500 gms from each of the bags ). The morphine was seized under S. 8 read with S. 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as 'narcotic Act') and Saleem Mohammed, the detenu was arrested. In connection with the investigation, statements under S. 67 of the Narcotic Act of Mohd. Saleem and Ramesh Chandra Patel were recorded. as per Annexure-'b' and Annexure-'c' respectively. An application for bail was moved on behalf of the detenu before the 5th Additional Judge to the Court of Sessions Judge, Indore which was heard and rejected on 24-6-1988. No challan was, however, filed in Court.
( 3 ) THE order of detention dt. 8th July, 1988 (Annexure-'f') was passed by the detaining authority under S. 3 (1) of the Ordinance and the detenu was served with the order of detention along with the grounds of detention through the Superintendent Central Jail, Indore where the detenu was already lodged.
( 4 ) THE grounds of detention disclose that one Rameshchandra Patel was a partner in the Firm M/s. Lord Chemical Works, Indore and the firm was receiving morphine from Government Opium Factory, Ghazipur for manufacture of medicines. The premises of Lord Chemical Works were searched and detailed investigations established that ramesh Chandra Patel was diverting the morphine, which was received legally from the Government Factory, for illicit purposes. It is further stated in the grounds of detention that the detenu had admitted his complicity in the illicit possession of morphine and had stated that Rameshchandra Patel and Lalit Patel used to give him the morphine for selling to Customers and that the detenu received the commission for doing this work at the rate of Rs. 2000/- per kilogram. It is also alleged in the grounds of detention that the detenu had, in the past, sold morphine on behalf of Rameshchandra Patel and Lalit Patel. It is stated that from these facts it is evident that the detenu knowingly involved himself in engaging in possession of narcotic drugs and therefore, the detaining authority is satisfied that the detenu should be detained under the provisions of the Ordinance with a view to preventing him from engaging in possession of narcotic drugs. It is also stated in the grounds of detention that even though the detenu is in jail there is every likelihood of his being released on bail.
( 5 ) SECTION 3 of the Ordinance empowers the detaining authority to make orders for detention of certain persons and reads as under :-''3. Power to make orders detaining certain persons. (1) The Central Government or a State Government, or any officer of the Central Government, not below the rank of a Joint Secretary to that Government, specially empowered for the purposes of this Section by the Government, or any officer of a State Government not below the rank of a Secretary to that Government, specially empowered for the purposes of this Section by that G