Repeat drug offence after bail justifies preventive detention: HC

08/08/2026

JAMMU, Aug 7: The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has upheld the preventive detention of a Rajouri resident under the Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (PITNDPS) Act, observing that his alleged involvement in another narcotics offence after securing bail showed that ordinary criminal law had failed to deter him.
Justice Rajnesh Oswal dismissed a habeas corpus petition filed by Mohd. Youns, challenging the detention order issued by the Divisional Commissioner, Jammu, on September 8, 2025, under Section 3 of the PITNDPS Act.
The detention was based on a dossier submitted by the Senior Superintendent of Police, Rajouri, citing two cases registered at Police Station Kandi under the NDPS Act.
According to the record, the first FIR (No. 96/2024), registered on August 21, 2024, alleged recovery of one kilogram of poppy straw from a vehicle driven by the petitioner. The second FIR (No. 52/2025), registered on May 19, 2025, related to the alleged recovery of 4.276 kilograms of poppy straw from a vehicle in which the petitioner was travelling with co-accused Javed Shah.
The court noted that the petitioner had been granted bail in the earlier case and was facing trial when he was allegedly involved in a similar offence. It also observed that the same vehicle was allegedly used in both cases, lending support to the authorities' claim of his involvement in illicit narcotics trafficking.
Rejecting the contention that the detention order had been passed mechanically, Justice Oswal held that the record reflected proper application of mind by the detaining authority.
The court further found that all relevant detention documents, including the detention order, grounds of detention, police dossier, FIRs, witness statements and other records running into 92 pages, had been supplied to the detenue. The documents were read out in English and explained to him in Hindi and Dogri, and he acknowledged receipt by signing the execution report.
On the argument that the detaining authority had failed to record its satisfaction that ordinary criminal law was inadequate, the court observed that the detention grounds specifically referred to the petitioner's alleged involvement in a second NDPS case after being released on bail in the first.
The High Court also rejected the plea that the detenue had not been informed of his right to make a representation, noting that the execution report showed he had been informed of his right to submit a representation to both the detaining authority and the government. It further noted that a representation filed through his wife on September 25, 2025, had been considered and rejected on October 4, 2025.
The court also dismissed the allegation that the grounds of detention were merely a verbatim reproduction of the police dossier, holding that a comparison of the two documents did not support the claim.
Advocate Rohit Bhalwal appeared for the petitioner, while Sagira Jaffer, Assisting Counsel to Senior Additional Advocate General Monika Kohli, represented the Union Territory administration.
Finding no merit in the challenge, Justice Oswal dismissed the petition and upheld the preventive detention order.

Photo Gallery

BSE Sensex

NSE Nifty