Back
2026 Supreme(HP) 495
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
VIVEK SINGH THAKUR, ROMESH VERMA, JJ.
Pawan Kumar - Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. & Others - Respondents
Cr.WP No. 19 of 2025
Decided On : 05-01-2026
Important Points
Subject
Criminal Law - Preventive Detention
Act Referred
Headnote
(B) Preventive detention - While in custody, material must show likelihood of release on bail and resumption of prejudicial activity; grant of bail does not invalidate detention based on overall material. (Paras 15,21)
Facts of the case:
Petitioner facing trial in six cases for recovery of contraband under NDPS Act; proposal for detention under PIT NDPS Act submitted considering past cases, assets disproportionate, threat to society; detained post release on bail in latest case; challenged detention order, board upholding and extension, claiming non-supply of grounds, no vernacular communication, illegal detention period post initial three months, non-execution, entitled to compensation; earlier writ disposed reserving liberty to challenge board order.
Findings of Court:
Detention order and extension upheld; no illegal detention or compensation; directions for procedural compliances under Sections 3,5.
Issues: Whether detention order illegal for non-specification of authority/government, non-supply of grounds/vernacular, improper execution, gap in detention period post initial term pre-board opinion, absence of reduction in crime post-arrest or bail apprehension; entitlement to compensation.
Ratio Decidendi: Detention justified by repeated illicit activities despite procedural irregularity in place specification; period from actual detention with board extension valid; grounds effectively made known enabling challenge; execution substantial compliance as post-order arrest warrant.
Result: Petition rejected; directions issued for compliance.
For the Petitioner:Ms. Devyani Sharma, Senior Advocate with Ms. Dhanwanti, Advocate.
For the Respondents:Mr. J.S. Guleria and Mr. Raj Negi, Deputy Advocate General.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. repeated ndps offenses justify preventive detention (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 2. detention requires vernacular grounds and bail risk (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 3. bail grant no bar to detention (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23) |
| 4. empowered officers may issue pit ndps orders (Para 24 , 25 , 26 , 27) |
| 5. government must specify detention places by order (Para 28 , 29 , 34 , 35) |
| 6. period runs from actual detention date (Para 30) |
| 7. orders executed as post-conviction warrants (Para 31 , 32) |
| 8. no violation of constitutional rights (Para 33) |
| 9. irregularity curable; issue compliance directions (Para 36 , 37) |
JUDGMENT :
Vivek Singh Thakur, J.
Petitioner, through his wife, has approached this Court invoking jurisdiction of this High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India against impugned detention order dated 5th May, 2025 (Annexure P-2) passed by Additional Chief Secretary (Home) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh, exercising the powers conferred by Section 3 (1) of the Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1988 ( for short ‘PIT NDPS Act, 1988’), directing to detain the petitioner in Lala Lajpat Rai District Jail Kangra at Dharamshala for three months as per the Act, which was upheld by H.P. State Advisory Board (PIT NDPS Act 1988) at Shimla (for short ‘Board’) on 11.8.2025 (Annexure P-6), extending the period of detention for further three months, praying for following reliefs:-
“i) That a writ in the nature of certiorari may kindly be issued to quash order dated 05th May, 2025 passed by respondent No. 1 and upheld by respondent No. 4-Board on 11.08.2025 when the period of detention has been extended for three months more;
ii). That a writ in the nature of mandamus may kindly be issued directing respondents No. 1 to 3 to pay a sum of Rs. Fifty Lakhs only (Rs.50,00,000/- only) to the petitioner for his illegal detention w.e.f. 06.08.2025 to 11.08.2025 on which date the order of detention dated 05.05.2025 passed by respondent No. 1 which was valid till 05.08.2025 has been upheld and further respondent No. 4-Board has ordered for extension of period of detention of the petitioner for three months;
iii) That a writ in the nature of mandamus may kindly be issued directing the respondents to place on record the proposal submitted by respondent No. 3 regarding issuance of preventive detention of the petitioner and quash the same.”
2. Petitioner had preferred Civil Writ Petition No. 10120 of 2025 on 23.6.2025 against his detention order dated 5.5.2025, however, the said Writ Petition was disposed with liberty reserved to the petitioner to lay challenge to order dated 11.8.2025 passed by the Board as well as order dated 5.5.2025, because during pendency of the said Writ Petition, the Board, vide order dated 11.8.2025, had upheld the detention order dated 5.5.2025 and had further opined that detention should be extended by further three months.
3. In sequel to opinion rendered by the Board, Additional Chief Secretary (Home) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh issued order dated 5.9.2025 directing detention of the petitioner for another three months from the date of earlier three months detention of detenu.
4. Admittedly, petitioner is facing trial in six cases, due to recovery of contraband from him, for commission of offense punishable under Sections 20, 21 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1988. Details of cases is as under:-
“i. In FIR No. 27/19 dated 22.02.19 at PS Kangra, District Kangra, H.P. u/s 20 & 21 of NDPS Act around 14.17 grams of Charas and 2.55 gram of Heroin/chitta were recovered from him;
ii. In FIR No. 09/20 dated 08.01.20 of PS Kangra, District Kangra HP. u/s 21 of NDPS Act, around 11.22 Gram of Heroin/chitta was recovered from him.
iii. FIR No. 189/20 dated 02.10.2020 at PS Kangra, District Kangra HP, u/s 21, 29 of NDPS Act, around 06.10 Gram of Heroin/chitta was recovered from him.
iv. FIR No. 19/23
