Madras High Court Allows Habeas Corpus Petition, Quashes Preventive Detention Order in NDPS Case Due to Non-Commercial Quantity of Kanja. Recovery of 2.5 kg Kanja Not Sufficient Ground for Preventive Detention Under Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982; Ordinary Criminal Law Adequate.

High Court: Madras High Court In Favour of Accused
  • 64
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner, Rita, mother of the detenu Lasar Merwin Vijay @ Merwin Vijay, filed a Habeas Corpus Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Madras High Court challenging the detention order passed by the second respondent (Commissioner of Police, Greater Chennai) in Memo No.1160/BCDFGISSSV/2024 dated 25.11.2024 under the Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982. The detenu was detained under preventive detention law based on a ground case registered under the NDPS Act, wherein the police recovered 2.5 kilograms of Kanja (cannabis). The court heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. R. Muthukumar, and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Mr. R. Muniyapparaj, appearing for the respondents. The court observed that the recovery of 2.5 kilograms of Kanja cannot be construed as a commercial quantity under the NDPS Act. Consequently, the police authorities could deal with the criminal case under ordinary law, and the reasons stated in the impugned order to invoke the Preventive Detention Law were insufficient. The court therefore quashed the detention order and directed that the detenu be set at liberty forthwith unless required in connection with any other case. The judgment was delivered by a division bench comprising Justice S.M. Subramaniam and Justice M. Jothiraman on 24.01.2025.

Headnote

A) Preventive Detention - NDPS Act - Non-Commercial Quantity - Insufficient Grounds - The detention order under the Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982 was quashed as the ground case involved recovery of 2.5 kg of Kanja, which is not a commercial quantity under the NDPS Act - The court held that the police authorities may deal with the criminal cases under ordinary law and the reasons stated to invoke preventive detention law were insufficient (Paras 3-4).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the preventive detention order under the Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982 is sustainable when the ground case involves recovery of 2.5 kg of Kanja, which is not a commercial quantity under the NDPS Act

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The impugned order of detention passed by the second respondent in Memo No.1160/BCDFGISSSV/2024 dated 25.11.2024 is quashed and the Habeas Corpus Petition stands allowed. The detenue, Lasar Merwin Vijay @ Merwin Vijay, S/o.Joseph Selvam, aged about 39 years, now confined in Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai, is directed to be set at liberty forthwith unless he is otherwise required in connection with any other case.

Law Points

  • Preventive detention cannot be invoked when the ground case involves recovery of non-commercial quantity of narcotic substance
  • ordinary criminal law is sufficient
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2025 LawText (MAD) (01) 135

H.C.P.No.3261 of 2024

2025-01-24

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, M.JOTHIRAMAN

Mr.R.Muthukumar, Mr.R.Muniyapparaj

Rita

State of Tamilnadu, Rep.by the Additional Chief Secretary, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department, Fort St.George, Chennai – 600 009; The Commissioner of Police, Greater Chennai, Vepery, Chennai – 600 007; The Inspector of Police, K-8, Arumbakkam Police Station, Chennai; The Superintendent of Prison, Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai – 600 066

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Habeas Corpus Petition challenging preventive detention order

Remedy Sought

Quashing of detention order and release of detenu

Filing Reason

Detention order under Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982 based on recovery of 2.5 kg Kanja, which is not commercial quantity

Issues

Whether the preventive detention order is sustainable when the ground case involves recovery of non-commercial quantity of narcotic substance

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner argued that the recovery of 2.5 kg Kanja is not commercial quantity, so preventive detention law should not be invoked Respondents argued in support of the detention order

Ratio Decidendi

Preventive detention cannot be invoked when the ground case involves recovery of a non-commercial quantity of a narcotic substance, as ordinary criminal law is sufficient to deal with such cases.

Judgment Excerpts

The police authorities recovered 2.5 kilograms of Kanja, which cannot be construed as commercial quantity. The reasons stated in the order impugned to invoke the Preventive Detention Law would be insufficient and therefore, we are inclined to interfere.

Procedural History

The petitioner filed Habeas Corpus Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the detention order dated 25.11.2024 passed by the second respondent. The court heard the matter and delivered judgment on 24.01.2025.

Acts & Sections

  • Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982:
  • Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act):
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Writ Petition for Pension Revision of Retired Zilla Parishad Employees — Denial of Benefits Based on Circular Held Unjustified. The court held that a circular cannot override statutory rules and that pre-1998 retirees are e...
Related Judgement
High Court Madras High Court Allows Habeas Corpus Petition, Quashes Preventive Detention Order in NDPS Case Due to Non-Commercial Quantity of Kanja. Recovery of 2.5 kg Kanja Not Sufficient Ground for Preventive Detention Under Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982; Ordinar...