1 2025:CGHC:4188-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPCR No. 37 of 2025 1 - Jodhram Rathore S/o Loknath Aged About 50 Years R/o Kera Road Janjgir District - Janjgir - Champa (C.G.) Represented By Brother Sunil Rathore S/o Loknath Aged About 38 Years R/o Kera Road Janjgir District - Janjgir - Champa (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary Home Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan Nava Raipur Raipur District - Raipur (C.G.) 2 - The Commissioner Cum Detaining Officer Bilaspur Division District - Bilaspur (C.G.) 3 - The Sub Divisional Officer (Police) Janjgir District- Janjgir - Champa (C.G.) 4 - Station House Officer Police Station City Kotwali Janjgir District - Janjgir - Champa (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Amit Singh Chauhan, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Mr. S. S. Baghel, Dy. Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice 23/01/2025 1. Heard Mr. Amit Singh Chauhan, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. S. S. Baghel, learned Dy. Govt. Advocate, appearing for the Respondent/State. 2. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner against the 2 impugned order dated 20.12.2024 passed by Commissioner-Cum-Preventing Authority, Bilaspur, Division Bilaspur in Case No. 55-B-121 year 2024-25. 3. Brief facts of the case are that an Istagasa was submitted against the petitioner before the Commissioner, Bilaspur, Division under Section 3 of the Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1988. It is alleged in the Istagasa, the present petitioner is habitually engaged in illegal trafficking of Ganja in the vicinity by which the public tranquility effected and public at large are the sufferers. Certain antecedents of the same nature of offence are also there against him and actively engaged in selling of Ganja. Considering the conduct and engagement in the illegal business of selling of Ganja, a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner as to why he should not be detained in jail for his involvement in illegal trafficking of Ganja. The petitioner has submitted his reply along with his affidavit and after hearing the parties, the Commissioner has passed the order on 20.12.2024 and sent the petitioner in detention for 06 months while exercising its power under Section 10 of the Act of 1988, which is under challenge in the present petition. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is having 3 criminal antecedents of the offence under the NDPS Act, which was of the year 2013, 2014 and 2022. He would further submits that out of 3 offences of NDPS Act, the two offence of the year 2013 and 2014 have been decided but the offence of the year 2022 is under consideration before the learned trial Court and the case is pending. He would further submits that there is no other case after 2022 against the petitioner. The Commissioner, only on apprehension had passed the order that the petitioner is actively engaged in illegal trafficking of Ganja. There is no concrete material available with them to believe that he actually involved in illegal trafficking of Ganja. There is no sources of their satisfaction yet they have passed the order which adversely affects the rights of the petitioner, therefore, impugned order may be set aside and the petitioner may be released from jail. 3 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes and submitted that the consideration of the Commissioner is based on substantive satisfaction that the petitioner is engaged in illegal trafficking of Ganja which affecting the public at large in the vicinity as well as in the city. As per their own submission, one case is still pending against the petitioner relating to the offence of the year 2022. Despite that there is allegation that he engaged in similar nature of offence. Though no offence has been registered against the petitioner but it is preventive measure under which the petitioner has been detained in jail to prevent the petitioner from engaging in illicit trafficking in Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances for which the impugned order has been passed which is strictly in accordance with law and needs no interference. 6. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents annexed with the petition. 7. Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, considering the nature of allegation and also the fact that the case under the NDPS Act against the petitioner with respect to the offence of the year 2022 is pending before the learned trial Court and there are information that he actively engaged in illegal trafficking of contraband Ganja and to prevent the petitioner from engaging in illicit trafficking in Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances, the Commissioner has passed the impugned order. We do not find any sufficient ground to interfere with the impugned order and to hold that the order passed by Commissioner is suffers from any perversity or illegality. 8. Consequently, we found no merits in the petition and the same is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Alok ALOK SHARMA Digitally signed by ALOK SHARMA Date: 2025.01.31 12:29:28 +0530