Detention Desirable in the Interest of Society: MP High Court Upholds Six-Month Preventive Custody of 21-Year-Old Habitual Offender Under PIT NDPS Act
Isabella Mariam
The High Court of Madhya Pradesh Division Bench of Justice Vivek Rusia and Justice Gajendra Singh held that a detention order issued under the Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1988 (PIT NDPS Act) remains valid even if it specifies a period of detention, as long as the ultimate authority to fix the duration lies with the State Government upon confirmation. Dismissing the writ petition, the Court found that the detaining authority’s mention of a six-month term did not vitiate the legal process or prejudice the advisory board’s independent review and confirmation.
The petitioner, a 21-year-old male, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging a preventive detention order dated October 24, 2024, issued by the Commissioner, Indore Division, under Section 3(1) of the PIT NDPS Act. He also challenged the subsequent confirmation of the detention by the State Government dated March 3, 2025, which extended the detention for a period of six months.
According to the record, the proceedings were initiated following a report by the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Zone – 1, dated September 4, 2024. The report, which cited four criminal cases against the petitioner, was forwarded by the Additional Commissioner to the Commissioner with a recommendation for detention. The offences cited involved:
- Section 8/21,29 of the NDPS Act (Bhawarkuan Police Station)
- Section 8/22 of the NDPS Act (Tilak Nagar Police Station)
- Section 8/22 of the NDPS Act (Aazad Nagar Police Station)
- Section 34 of the M.P. Excise Act (Vijay Nagar Police Station)
Following this, the Commissioner passed a detention order citing the petitioner as a habitual offender engaged in illicit drug trafficking. At the time of the order, the petitioner was already in custody in connection with Crime No. 827/2024 under Section 8/22,29 of the NDPS Act. The grounds of detention were formally served on January 17, 2025.
The detention order was forwarded to the State Government on January 22, 2025, in accordance with Section 3(ii) of the PIT NDPS Act, which mandates such submission within 10 days. The State Government then transmitted the matter to the Central Government and, by letter dated February 27, 2025, informed the Commissioner that it had been referred to the Advisory Board. The Advisory Board, exercising powers under Section 9(f) of the Act, approved the detention on March 3, 2025. The State Government thereafter confirmed the detention.
The petitioner contested the validity of the detention primarily on procedural grounds. His counsel argued that the Commissioner overstepped his authority by prescribing a detention period of six months in the initial order, which allegedly influenced the Advisory Board and the State Government in confirming the duration. In support, the petitioner relied on the Supreme Court judgment in Pesala Nookaraju v. Government of Andhra Pradesh [Criminal Appeal No. 2304 of 2023].
The State countered that the procedural timelines and authority under the PIT NDPS Act were followed meticulously. It submitted that the final confirmation of the detention period lies solely with the State Government and the mention of duration by the detaining authority had no binding effect.
The Division Bench recorded: “As per the scheme of the PIT NDPS Act, the Central Government or State Government… may pass an order under Section 3(2) directing that such person be detained.”
It further stated: “In this sub-section (3), the period of detention is not specified hence there is no requirement for the authority to mention the period of detention in an order.”
Referring to the obligations of the State under Section 9(b) and 9(c) of the Act, the Court noted: “The appropriate Government shall… place before the Advisory Board… within five weeks from the date of detention,” and “The Advisory Board shall… record its opinion about the confirmation of detention order in 11 weeks.”
The Court observed: “Section 11 of the PIT NDPS Act provides for maximum period of detention i.e. 12 months from the date of detention. Therefore, the State Government has the power to fix the period… irrespective of the period proposed or fixed by the detaining authority.”
Citing the judgment in Pesala Nookaraju, the Court quoted:
“When the State Government passes a confirmatory order under Section 12… such a confirmatory order need not be restricted to a period of three months only… it can be… up to a maximum period of twelve months from the date of detention.”
“The continuation of the detention… need not also specify the period… If any period is specified… then the period of detention would be up to such period; if no period is specified, then it would be for a maximum of twelve months.”
The Court concluded: “Even if the authority has fixed the period… there is no question that the State Government will be influenced by it.”
The Court recorded: “The petitioner, who is aged about 21 years has been found involved in three cases under the provisions of the NDPS Act and one case under M.P. Excise Act. After being released on bail, he has been continuously committing the crime of illicit trafficking of narcotic drugs, therefore, the impugned order of detention is desirable and in the interest of the society. Hence, no case for interference is made out.”
Accordingly, the Division Bench issued the following order: “In view of the above, the Writ Petition stands dismissed.”
No further directions were issued, and the Court concluded that the preventive detention confirmed by the State Government was lawful and appropriate in the circumstances of the case.
Advocates Representing the Parties
For the Petitioners: Shri Makbook Ahmad Mansoori, Advocate
For the Respondents: Shri Sudeep Bhargava, Deputy Advocate General
Case Title : Atul v. Union of India and Others
Neutral Citation: 2025:MPHC-IND:9783
Case Number: W.P. No. 9022 of 2025
Bench: Justice Vivek Rusia, Justice Gajendra Singh
[Read/Download order]
