The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh recently observed that an order of preventive detention may be passed before, during or even after criminal prosecution against a detenue [Amjad Khan V/s Union Territory of J&K]..Justice Vinod Chatterji Koul explained that preventive detention is not meant to punish acts already done, but is an anticipatory measure that is resorted to based on reasonable suspicions to prevent acts that could disturb public order, the security of the state or other objects outlined in the preventive detention law. He observed that there is no requirement to prove any offence while ordering a person's preventive detention. Rather, such orders are based on suspicion or reasonable probability of how a person may behave in future, based on his past conduct. "The power of preventive detention is exercised in reasonable anticipation. It may or may not relate to an offence. It does not overlap with the prosecution even if it relies on certain facts for which prosecution may be, or may have been, launched. An order of preventive detention may be made before or during prosecution. It may be made with or without prosecution and in anticipation or after discharge or even acquittal. The pendency of prosecution is no bar to an order of preventive detention. An order of preventive detention is also not a bar to prosecution," the Court added. .The Court made this observation while dismissing a petition challenging the order of preventive detention against one, Amjad Khan, under the Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1988.The authorities said that he was placed under such detention since he was engaged in the repeated illegal traffic of drugs, to prevent him from committing similar offences and to secure the health and welfare of public at large. The detaining authority justified its decision by referring to two criminal cases registered against Khan.Khan, however, contended that his preventive detention was unjustified and ordered without complying with procedural safeguards and without any application of mind. On examining the material on record, however, the Court did not find any merit in Khan's arguments. .The High Court further observed that drug trafficking is a serious threat to public health, safety, the well-being of humanity and the national economy. Therefore, it is necessary to take measures to curb such practices, including preventive detention, the Court observed."Due to India's close proximity with major opium growing areas of the region, India is facing serious menace of drug trafficking and as a spill-over effect, drug abuse especially among the youth is a matter of concern for us ... it is necessary for the effective prevention of such activities to provide for detention of persons concerned in any manner therewith," the November 25 order said. .With these observations, the Court dismissed the detenue's plea and upheld his preventive detention..Advocate Tanveer Khan appeared for the petitioner.Senior Additional Advocate General Monika Kohli appeared for the Jammu and Kashmir government. .[Read Order]
