High Courts Should Not Interfere In Academic Integrity Proceedings At Preliminary Stage: Kerala High Court Power Of Attorney Holder With Personal Knowledge Can Depose In Cheque Bounce Cases: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Acquittal Divorce Cannot Be Granted Merely on WhatsApp Chats: Bombay High Court Sets Aside Ex-Parte Decree Based on Unproved Electronic Evidence State Cannot Demand Settlement Amount Yet Withhold Legitimate Refund: Bombay High Court Strikes Down MVAT Settlement Order Surveyor’s Report Is Not Sacrosanct; Arbitral Award Ignoring Vital Evidence Is Perverse: Delhi High Court Sets Aside Insurance Arbitration Award When Victim Lives Under Exclusive Control Of Accused, Burden Shifts To Accused To Explain What Happened: Calcutta High Court Medical Evidence Clearly Indicating Suicide Cannot Be Overlooked, Prosecution Must Prove Homicidal Death Beyond Reasonable Doubt: Andhra Pradesh High Court 'Candidates Acted With Full Knowledge of Consequences': Kerala High Court Reverses Order for Refund of 10% Exit Fee in Medical PG Mop-Up Admissions Dispensing with Departmental Inquiry Without Material is Arbitrary: Supreme Court Sets Aside Dismissal of Delhi Police Constable Power Of Attorney Holder Authorized To Enforce Pre-Emption Right Can File Suit, Death Of Principal Does Not Bar Legal Heirs: Orissa High Court Government Servant Convicted In Criminal Case Can Be Dismissed Without Departmental Enquiry: Tripura High Court Upholds Teacher’s Dismissal RTI Cannot Be Used To Bypass Statutory Bar On Police Case Diaries: Punjab & Haryana High Court Sets Aside Penalty Against Police Officers Externment Cannot Be Based On Police Report And Stale Cases: Madhya Pradesh High Court Quashes District Magistrate’s Order Even Exonerated Accused Can Be Summoned During Trial: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Summoning Under Section 358 BNSS Benefit of Doubt Acquittal Not Equal to Honourable Acquittal: Supreme Court Upholds Rejection of Police Constable Candidate Madras High Court Allows NEET-Failed Student To Appear In CBSE Class XII Mathematics Exam After Last-Minute Subject Switch By Parents Salary of Parents Cannot Be Used to Deny OBC Non-Creamy Layer Status in Absence of Post Equivalence: Supreme Court Father Who Rapes Minor Daughter Cannot Seek Leniency: Bombay High Court Upholds Life Imprisonment Construction Of Toilet Is Bare Necessity For Proper Use Of Premises, Expression "Own Use" Not Confined To Landlord's Personal Physical Use: Calcutta High Court 353 IPC | Conviction Cannot Rest On Uncorroborated Testimony Of Sole Witness When Other Evidence Contradicts Occurrence: Delhi High Court Upholds Acquittal 250 BNSS | 60-Day Discharge Period Is Procedural, Does Not Extinguish Accused's Right To Seek Discharge: Gujarat High Court Section 45 PMLA Cannot Become an Instrument of Endless Incarceration: Himachal Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in ₹18 Crore Scholarship Scam Case Land Acquisition — Heirs Who Slept on Rights for 23 Years Cannot Claim Ignorance to Revive Dead Challenge: Karnataka High Court Institutional Hearing Is No Violation of Natural Justice: Kerala High Court Upholds BPCL’s Termination of Decades-Old Petroleum Dealership Witnesses Not Expected To Recount Past Incidents With Mathematical Precision, Minor Contradictions Don't Demolish Credibility: Orissa High Court If a Suit Is Ex Facie Barred by Limitation, the Court Has No Choice but to Dismiss It: P&H High Court

J&K HC Upholds Preventive Detention Order in Narcotic Drugs Case, Citing Grave Threat to Public Health and Safety

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has upheld the order of preventive detention passed against Mohammad Ashraf Dar in a case related to illicit trafficking of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances. The court, while pronouncing its judgment in WP (Crl) no.380/2022, emphasized the grave threat posed by drug abuse to public health, safety, and the welfare of society, particularly the younger generation.

In its detailed judgment, the High Court addressed several crucial aspects of the case. The court noted that the order of detention was passed by the Divisional Commissioner, Kashmir, under the Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1988. The petitioner had argued that the detaining authority lacked jurisdiction to issue the order. However, the court held that the order was passed under the corresponding Central Act, which had been extended to the Union Territory of J&K.

The court further examined the grounds of detention and dismissed the petitioner's contention of vague allegations. It emphasized that the detaining authority had provided compelling and cogent reasons for the preventive detention order. The court observed that the detenu was involved in illegal drug trade, exploiting vulnerable individuals, particularly the youth, and fueling addiction and criminal activities.

Addressing the issue of procedural safeguards, the court examined the detention record and found that the material relied upon by the detaining authority had indeed been provided to the detenu. Therefore, the court held that the Constitutional and statutory safeguards under Article 22(5) had been upheld.

The court underscored the purpose and scope of preventive detention, highlighting that its objective was not punitive but preventive. It noted that the detention order was based on a reasonable probability of the detenu engaging in similar prejudicial acts in the future. The court further emphasized the serious menace of drug trafficking and abuse, which posed a threat to national security, sovereignty, and the overall well-being of society.

J&K High Court dismissed the writ petition and upheld the order of preventive detention. It confirmed the jurisdiction of the detaining authority and declared the grounds of detention to be valid. The court recognized the necessity of preventive detention to combat illicit traffic in narcotic drugs and protect public health and safety.

Mohammad Ashraf Dar vs  Union Territory of J&K and others

Latest Legal News