Kerala High Court Upholds Preventive Detention Under PITNDPS Act Despite Bail

Court affirms that preventive detention can be justified for a detenu on bail, highlighting insufficiency of bail conditions to curb drug-related activities.

The Kerala High Court, in a significant ruling, upheld the preventive detention order under the Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1988 (PITNDPS Act) against Sabin, the son of petitioner Jalaludeen K., despite him being on bail. The Division Bench comprising Dr. A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar and Jobin Sebastian, JJ., delivered the judgment on November 12, 2025, dismissing the writ petition challenging the detention order.

The case originated from an order of detention dated July 26, 2025, confirmed by the government on October 4, 2025, following an Advisory Board's opinion, mandating Sabin's detention for a year. The detention was premised on his involvement in drug-related activities, with the latest incident registered as Crime No.475/2025 at Kazhakuttam Police Station under Sections 22(b) and 29 of the NDPS Act.

The petitioner argued the detention order was illegal and arbitrary, asserting that the bail conditions were sufficient to prevent Sabin from further criminal activities. Furthermore, the counsel pointed out a significant three-year gap between the last two incidents, questioning the necessity of the detention order.

However, the court, after hearing arguments from both parties, found the jurisdictional authority had considered the bail conditions and determined they were insufficient to prevent further criminal activities. The court emphasized that preventive detention is permissible even for individuals on bail if compelling circumstances necessitate it.

The court dismissed the argument regarding the time gap between incidents, stating that a single case under the NDPS Act justifies detention under the PITNDPS Act, and thus the time lapse was immaterial to the detaining authority's satisfaction.

Concluding the judgment, the court stated that the petitioner failed to demonstrate any grounds for interference, reaffirming the detention order's legality and the procedural compliance in its issuance.

Bottom Line:

Preventive detention under the PITNDPS Act can be justified even if the detenu is already on bail, provided the sufficiency of bail conditions and compelling circumstances are considered and reflected in the detention order.

Statutory provision(s): Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1988, Section 3(1)

Jalaludeen K. v. State of Kerala, (Kerala)(DB) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2807113