KALAM MIAH Vs. CHAIRMAN, ADVISORY BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioner has been detained under Sec. 3(1) of the Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1988 ('PIT NDPS Act' in short) by the order dtd. 9/9/2021 under No.F.15(9)-PD/ 2021(P-VII)/2545 on the purported grounds of nefarious activities in trafficking of NDPS and forming illegal business ring for proliferation of such activities. By means of such purported business which is grossly illegal, petitioner is stated to have enmassed huge properties. It would appear from the record that the detention order dtd. 9/9/2021 had been served on the petitioner on 24/9/2021. Involvement of the petitioner in Dharmanagar P.S. case No. 2018 DMN191 dtd. 16/12/2018 registered under Ss. 20(ii)(c) and 29 of the NDPS Act and the report of the Director General of Police proposing preventive detention of the petitioner were mainly considered by the detaining authority for forming the opinion for detention. Pursuant to the impugned detention order, petitioner Kalam Miah alias Kala has been undergoing preventive detention w.e.f 24/9/2021.

(2.) As stated, the detention order was issued on 9/9/2021 by the Secretary to the Government of Tripura in the Home Department which was served on the detenue on 24/9/2021 and he was detained on the same day i.e. 24/9/2021. Grounds of his detention are stated to be as under:

(3.) Petitioner was apprised of his right to make representation to the Central/State Government, detaining authority as well as to the advisory Board. He submitted a written representation to the detaining authority on 22/10/2021 claiming that he was falsely implicated in the NDPS case. No contraband was seized from his possession. He was not even spotted at the place of occurrence. He claimed that he was entangled in the case falsely on the basis of suspicion. He further claimed in his written representation that police submitted a false report against him to the detaining authority because most of the criminal cases which were shown pending against him under various provisions of IPC were already disposed of and he was acquitted in those cases. He asserted that in the NDPS case on the basis of which the detention order was issued against him, no contraband was seized from his possession. The contraband was allegedly seized from one Md.Helal Mia as per the seizure list. He stated in his representation that he was the sole bread winner of his family consisting of his old and ailing mother, his wife and his minor nephew and he was in extreme financial constraints due to the outbreak of COVID-19 when a false case under NDPS Act was registered against him.