Sr. No.99 HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH ATJAMMU Reserved on: 07.08.2025 Pronounced on: 19 .08.2025 Mohd. Shakoor, S/O Mohd Bashir .....Petitioner(s)

R/O Dhanidhar Tehsil & District Rajouri Through wife Shabnum Kouser Through :- Mr. Idrees Saleem Dar, Advocate.

v/s

1. Union Territory of J&K .....Respondent(s)

Through Financial Commissioner (ACS) to Govt., Home Department, Civil Secretariat, Jammu/Srinagar.

2. Divisional Commissioner, Jammu. 3. Superintendent of Police, Rajouri.

4. Superintendent, Central Jail, Jammu Through :- Mrs. Monika Kohli, Sr. AAG CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.A.CHOWDHARY, JUDGE

JUDGMENT

1. Divisional Commissioner, Jammu (hereinafter called ‘Detaining Authority’) in exercise of powers under Section 3 of the Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act 1988 (PIT NDPS Act) r/w SRO 247 of 1998 dated 27.07.1998, passed the detention Order No. PITNDPS 39 of 2024 dated 06.11.2024 (for short ‘impugned order’), in terms whereof the petitioner namely Mohd Shakoor S/O Mohd Bashir R/O Dhanidhar, Tehsil & District Rajouri (for short ‘detenue’), has been detained.

2. The impugned detention order has been challenged through the medium of the instant petition, being in breach of the provisions of Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India read with provisions of PIT NDPS Act, asserting therein that the detention order so passed against the petitioner is illegal and arbitrary as the translated version of documents was not communicated to the detenue, which vitiates the impugned detention order; that the representation filed on behalf of the detenue on 09.12.2024 was not considered; that in all the 5 FIRs lodged against the detenue, he is on bail in all the cases; that earlier also, detenue was detained under PIT NDPS Act on the basis of 9 FIRs, and this time, earlier 4 FIRs are again made basis for passing the impugned detention order; that the detaining authority has not mentioned a word in the detention order with regard to the satisfaction drawn by it as to how it has come to the conclusion of passing the detention order.

3. Furthermore, it is stated that the petitioner has not committed any offence nor he is involved in the commission of any offence under the NDPS Act which pose a serious threat to the health and welfare of the people, but the detaining authority without the application of mind and without considering the material on record had issued and passed the impugned detention order, which is illegal, unjustified, unwarranted under law and, as such, the same is liable to be quashed. It is also submitted that the order of detention and the connected documents annexed with the petition clearly show violation of right of the detenue guaranteed in terms of Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India and the provisions of PIT NDPS Act.

4. Respondents, in their counter affidavit, have stated that the detenue is a habitual drug peddler involved in possession and transportation of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances; that the detenue was ordered to be detained under the provisions of Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1988 and that, had he been let free, there would have been every likelihood of his re-indulging in criminal activities. It is also being stated that the petitioner has filed representation to the Principal Secretary, Home Department for revocation of detention order and the same was under active consideration of the Government; that on consideration of dossier submitted by the SSP, Rajouri, the respondent no.2 carefully examined the dossier and the relevant records attached with it, as a result, it was found imperative to detain the detenue under the relevant provisions of PIT NDPS Act; that the petitioner after getting bail was again involved in the illicit trafficking of narcotic drugs and was posing grave threat to the public order as well as to the health and welfare of the people; that the ordinary law has failed