MRS. FARHANA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner who is the wife of Sri Syed Nazeem (detenue) has preferred this petition to declare the detention order No.02/BCP/CRM/PIT-NDPS/DTN/2020 dated 30.09.2020 (Annexure-A) passed by second respondent and confirmed by first respondent by order No.HD 34 PND 2020 dated 22.12.2020 (Annexure-E) as illegal and to set the detenue at liberty.

(2.) Petitioner has contended that Section 3(1) of the Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1988 (for short 'PITNDPS Act') empowers the authorities specified thereunder to pass detention order and the Commissioner of Police namely, second respondent is not entitled to pass the detention order dated 30.09.2020 (Annexure-A). It is further contended that there cannot be any delegation of power to the Commissioner of Police to pass an order and as such, order of detention is illegal and liable to be set aside.

(3.) Further grounds urged in the writ petition is that under Section 9(b) of the PITNDPS Act, 'appropriate Government' has to refer the matter to the Advisory Board within five weeks and records do not disclose as to who has referred the matter to the Advisory Board. It is further urged that detenue was produced before the Advisory Board through video conference for the first time on 25.11.2020 i.e., after expiry of seven weeks and five days as the detenue was under detention since 01.10.2020 and on account of reference not being made to the Advisory Board within five weeks, same is liable to be set aside. Grievance of the petitioner is that order of detention has been mechanically passed and there is non-application of mind and there is no material to indicate that respondents have gone through the entire material and derived substantive satisfaction before passing the detention order. Hence, on these grounds and amongst others as urged in the petition, it has been prayed to set the detenue at liberty by quashing the impugned orders.