HC: Preventive detention on mere suspicion ‘draconian’
Chandigarh: The Punjab and Haryana High Court has issued a significant ruling clarifying that preventive detention orders should not be used to enforce ‘Police Rule’ on mere suspicion. Instead, credible evidence and a clear likelihood of the detainee’s involvement in crimes must be established.
The ruling came while the court was examining the legality of preventive detention orders issued under the Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1988. These orders were challenged on the grounds that they were based solely on the petitioners’ involvement in other cases registered under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act).
Justice Vinod S Bhardwaj said: “The power of preventive detention is not just an empowering provision with no responsibility or checks. When the power is immense, invocation of the power needs to be justified as per the exceptional circumstances and to establish as to how only the mode of preventive detention is the only way forward. It is not a mode of enforcing Police rule on suspicion or heightened probabilities but for reasons beyond that and on credible likelihood of his involvement in another crime.”
The court underscored that credible evidence must be supported by a proximate and live link to an imminent involvement in another crime. Without such credible input, the exercise of this power may be deemed excessive, arbitrary, draconian and liable to be set aside.
Justice Bhardwaj highlighted that while the grounds for preventive detention may vary across statutes, the constitutional safeguards are paramount. These safeguards are in addition to those provided under the respective statutes. The court was hearing a batch of nine writ petitions challenging preventive detention orders passed by the Haryana Government. The core issue was whether such orders could be issued solely based on the accused’s past involvement in NDPS Act cases and the likelihood of future offences.
