Telangana Prevention of Dangerous Activities of BootLeggers, Dacoits, Drug-Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders, [Land-Grabbers, Spurious Seed Offenders, Insecticide Offenders, Fertiliser Offenders, Food Adulteration Offenders, Fake Document Offenders, Scheduled Commodities Offenders, Forest Offenders, Gaming Offenders, Sexual Offenders, Explosive Substances Offenders, Arms Offenders, Cyber Crime Offenders and White Collar or Financial Offenders] Act, 1986 – ss.2(a), 2(f), 3(2), 3(3) – Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 – s.8(c) r/w s.20(b)(ii) (b) – Preventive detention – Daughter of detenu challenged detention order – Detention based on three criminal cases under NDPS Act alleging possession and peddling of ganja, and was found to be “drug offender” – Apprehension recorded that if released on bail she would continue illegal activities – Detention order upheld by High Court – Correctness:
Held: Order of detention merely refers to three crimes registered against the detenu – If the Detaining Authority was of the view that the detenu had violated any conditions of bail, steps for cancellation of her liberty could have been taken – That was not done – Mere apprehension on the part of the detaining authority that in the event of the detenu being released on bail, she was likely to indulge in similar crimes that would be prejudicial to maintenance of public order would not be a sufficient ground to order her preventive detention – Order of detention does not indicate in what manner the maintenance of public order was either adversely affected or was likely to be adversely affected so as to detain the detenu – Mere reproduction of the expressions mentioned in s.2(a) in the order of detention would not be sufficient – There is a fine distinction between “law and order” and “public order” – Mere registration of three offences by itself would not have any bearing on the maintenance of public order unless there is material to show that the narcotic drug dealt with by the detenu was in fact dangerous to public health under the Act of 1986, which is missing in the order of detention – Order of detention unsustainable and is quashed and set aside. [Paras 7-11]
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Headnotes prepared by: Nidhi Jain. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.