##PAGE1##

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH

AT JAMMU

HCP No. 136/2025

Reserved on: 26.02.2026

Pronounced on : 06.03.2026

Uploaded on : 06.03.2026

Whether the operative part or full

judgment is pronounced: Full

Mohd. Arif

….Petitioners

Through:- Mr. Ajay Gandotra, Advocate.

V/s

UT of J&K & Ors

…..Respondents

Through:- Mrs. Monika Kohli, Sr. AAG with

Ms. Chetna Manhas, Assisting Counsel.

\

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY DHAR, JUDGE

(JUDGMENT)

01. The petitioner, through the medium of the present

petition, has challenged Order No. PITNDPS 41 of 2025 dated

04.07.2025 (hereinafter to be referred to as “impugned order

of detention”) issued by respondent No. 2-Divisional

Commissioner, Jammu whereby while exercising powers under

Section 3(1) of the Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs

and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1988 (hereinafter to be

referred to as “PITNDPS”), the detaining authority has ordered

preventive detention of the petitioner.

02. The petitioner has challenged the impugned order of

detention on the grounds that the same has been passed

HCP No. 136/2025 Page 1 of 6

without application of mind. It has been contended that the

impugned order of detention has been passed with an

objective, which is alien to the object contemplated by Section

3 of the PITNDPS Act. It has been further contended that

there is no proximate and live link between the alleged

incidents forming basis of the grounds of detention with the

order of detention as a result of which the same becomes

unsustainable in law. It has also been contended the grounds

of detention have not been explained to the petitioner in a

language which he understands. It has further been

contended that whole of the material, forming basis of the

grounds of detention, has not been provided to the petitioner

as a result of which he was unable to make an effective

representation against the impugned order of detention.

03. The petition has been contested by the respondents

by filing counter affidavit of respondent No. 2-the detaining

authority. In the counter affidavit, it has been contended that

the petitioner, after getting bail in the cases in which he was

booked, again involved himself in illicit trafficking of narcotic

drugs, which was posing threat to the public order as well as

to the health and welfare of the people. Accordingly, the

detaining authority, after examining the dossier submitted by

SSP, Rajouri has drawn subjective satisfaction about the

imperative need to pass the detention order against the

petitioner. Consequently, the impugned order of detention was

passed.

HCP No. 136/2025 Page 2 of 6

04. It has been submitted that while executing the

warrant of detention, entire material along with grounds of

detention etc (total 114 leaves) was furnished to the petitioner

and the contents thereof were explained to him in Hindi and

urdu language. It has been contended that the petitioner was

informed about his right to make representation before the

Government as well as before the detaining authority against

the detention order. In order to lend support to the aforesaid

contentions, the respondents have produced the detention

record.

05. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and

perused record of the case including the detention record.

06. Although learned counsel for the petitioner has

raised numerous grounds for assailing the impugned order of

detention, yet during the course of arguments, he has laid

much emphasis on the ground that there has been non-

application of mind on the part of the detaining authority while

passing the impugned order of detention inasmuch as the said

order has been passed for an objective, which is alien to the

purpose mentioned in Section 3 of the PITNDPS Act.

07. In the context of the above ground, if we have a look

at the grounds of detention, the detaining authority has, after

narrating the factual aspects, forming basis of lodging of FIR

Nos. 414/2023 and 327/2024 registered with Police Station,

Rajouri, four General Diary entries and one confidential report