A.S. PONRAJ Vs. GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, REP. BY JOINT SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, NEW DELHI, AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER himself is the detenu. He has pleaded for issue of a habeas, for his production before this Court to be set free, after quashing the impugned order of detention dated. 26.2.1993 passed against him by the first Respondent, in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 3(1) of the Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1988, with a view to preventing him from engaging in conspiring in the transportation and storage of narcotic drugs.

(2.) FACTS which led to the passing of the impugned order, will have to be briefly stated: On the basis of intelligence information, that the Petitioner had deposited about 3 kgs of heroin belonging to him, at the residence of one Sundararajulu, the said premises bearing Door No. 126 Alwar Thirunagar Annexe, Madras -87 was searched on the night of 17/18.12.1992 by the Officers of Narcotic Control Bureau. Rajamannar, brother -in -law of the detenu informed the officials before they commenced the search, that the detenu had given a black colour Echolac brief case containing narcotic drugs to him, for safe keeping and that he had kept this brief case in the kitchen loft and he was willing to produce the same. The brief case had a number lock. The combination of numbers to open the brief case was provided by Rajamannar. The gross weight of several packets of heroin found in the brief case was 3.010 kgs. After follow up action, officers proceeded to door No. l Anna Main Road, Directors Colony Kodambakkam, Madras -24, which is the office premises of the detenu. Apart from Indian Currency and US Dollars, in the third drawer of the table two small packets (brown colour) were noticed which on examination, was found to be heroin, each packet approximately weight in 5 gms. Usual arrest and production before the concerned Magistrate for remand followed. Thereafter, the impugned order of detention was passed.

(3.) MR . K. Asokan, Additional Central Government Standing Counsel, contended that the weight of the samples sent for analysis was only approximate, while in the Laboratory, by using sophisticated scientific instrument, correct weights were recorded.