High Court of Chhattisgarh
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:23550-DB NAFR RAHUL JHA Digitally signed by RAHUL JHA Date: 2025.06.13 10:24:00 +0530 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPCR No. 295 of 2025 1 - Teekaram S/o Tameshwar Prasad Nai Aged About 58 Years (Wrongly Written As 34 Years), Through- His Wife Chandrakala Shriwas Wife Of Teekaram, Aged About 55 Years, Resident Of Village Jhabar, Police Station Deepka, District Korba (C.G.) versus Petitioner(s) 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through- The Superintendent Of Police, Korba, District Korba (C.G.) 2 - Commissioner-Cum-Detaining Authority Bilaspur, Division, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) Respondent(s) (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner(s)
Legal Reasoning
: Mr. Praveen Dhurandhar, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. S.S. Baghel, Dy. GA Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon’ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice 12/06/2025 1. Heard Mr. Praveen Dhurandhar, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. S. S. Baghel, Dy. Govt. Advocate for respondent/ State. 2. The present is a writ petition filed by the petitioner against the impugned 2 order dated 31/12/2024 passed by the Commissioner-cum-Detaining Authority, Bilaspur in Criminal Case No. 20240990100098/B-121/2024- 25 whereby the Commissioner while exercising the powers under Section 3 read with Section 11 of Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drug and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1988 (in short “Act of 1988”) passed the order for detaining the petitioner in jail for six months. 3. The brief facts of the case are that a Istagasa was produced in respect of petitioner by the respondent No.1 under Section 13 of the Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act 1988 (hereinafter referred as Act-1988) before the respondent No.2, subsequently on the basis of which the proceedings under the Act-1988 was initiated before the respondent No.2, where the case was registered as Case No.20240990100098/B-121/2024-25. In the proceedings, the statement of Station House Officer Deepka, was recorded wherein it was submitted that there was frequent information against the petitioner for illicit sale of contraband and also complaints were received and in the year 2007 from the possession of petitioner 100 Gms Ganja was seized, for which Crime No.80/2007 was registered for the offence under Section 20 (B) of NDPS Act and also in the year 2003 the petitioner was found carrying 500 Gms Ganja for which crime was registered as Crime No.395/2003 and the offence was registered under Section 27 of NDPS Act. It was also reported that even after above proceedings there was no correction in the status of the petitioner and he is complaint to be involved in the illicit Trafficking of Contraband and he is a habitual offender, thus recommendation was made for detention of the petitioner 3 under the Act-1988. 4. Subsequently, in the proceedings, the petitioner was provided with the Istagasa and other documents and the reply was sought and the statement was also recorded, wherein the petitioner denied the allegations and it was submitted by that he has been acquitted in the both the charges stated above and he prayed for rejection of the proceeding initiated under the Act-1988. 5. After considering the documents and the material on record, the respondent No.2 passed the impugned order dated 31-12-2024 (Annexure P-1) whereby in light of Section 3 read with 11 of the Act- 1988, the respondent No.2 came to the finding that the petitioner was involved in the year 2007 for trafficking of Ganja and there is apprehension that he would continued the same and thus in the light of Section 10 of the Act-1988, the petitioner has been directed to be detained for the period of 06 months. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that before passing the order of detention, the reply submitted by the petitioner has not been considered properly and before passing the order, no opportunity of personal hearing was provided. Merely on the basis of statement of Station House Officer Deepka, the Commissioner has passed the impugned order. No new offence have been registered against the petitioner and there is no sufficient material against the petitioner to conclude that he actively engaged in the illegal activities or trafficking 4 the narcotic drugs. He would further submit that the was prosecuted under the NDPS Act in the year 2003 and 2007 and it was stated that the petitioner is habitual criminal and would involve in trafficking of contraband, such a finding is illegal, because there is no recent offence registered against the petitioner and in the reply the petitioner has already submitted that he has already acquitted in all the previous crime numbers, hence the order of detention is arbitrary without application of
Decision
mind and is illegal. Therefore, the impugned order is liable to be set aside. 7. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes and submitted that from the impugned order itself, as well as the document annexed with the petition, it is quite vivid that the petitioner is actively engaged in illegal activities and to prevent such illegal activities of narcotic drugs or any other type of offence, he is directed to be detained in Central Jail, Bilaspur for six months, which is passed strictly in accordance with law and needs no interference. 8. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material produced with the petition. 9. From perusal of the material annexed with the petition, it appears that the offence under Section 20 (B) of NDPS Act as Crime No.80/2007 and under Section 27 of NDPS Act. Offence as Crime No.395/2003 were registered against the petitioner. The Commissioner, Bilaspur has passed its order only on the basis of oral evidence of Station House Officer, Deepka who stated that there was frequent information against the 5 petitioner for illicit sale of contraband and also complaints were received and in the year 2007 from the possession of petitioner 100 Gms Ganja was seized, for which Crime No.80/2007 was registered for the offence under Section 20 (B) of NDPS Act and also in the year 2003 the petitioner was found carrying 500 Gms Ganja for which crime was registered as Crime No.395/2003 and the offence was registered under Section 27 of NDPS Act and therefore the petitioner, is liable to be detained in jail. The consideration of the Commissioner, is based on only apprehension that the petitioner is indulge in illegal activities for which they received inputs but there is no concrete material to draw the conclusion that the petitioner indulge in illegal activities. 10. We, therefore, do not found any sufficient ground to uphold the order passed by the Commissioner, Bilaspur, dated 31/12/2024 (Annexure-P/1). 11. In view of the above, the impugned order dated 31/12/2024 is set aside. The matter is remitted back to the Commissioner, Bilaspur to pass the appropriate order afresh after providing opportunity of hearing to the petitioner in accordance with law. The petitioner is reported to be in jail, he shall be released forthwith if not required in any other case. 12. In the result, the present petition is allowed in the aforesaid terms. Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) Judge Rahul/Gowri Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice