1 2025:CGHC:20347 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 1509 of 2025 1 - Shiv Kumar Sahu S/o Munna Lal Sahu Aged About 34 Years R/o Village And Tahsil Lawan, Ward No. 4, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through The Commissioner (Detaining Officer) (Under Prevention Of Illicit Traffic In Ndps Act-1988), Raipur Division Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Superintendent of Police, Police Station Lawan, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) 3 - Station House Officer, Police Station Lawan, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Raghvendra Pradhan, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Ms. Pragya Shrivastava, Dy. Govt. Advocate. Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J. Order on Board 02/05/2025 1. The petitioner has filed the instant petition under Section 528 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (in short “BNSS”) for quashing of the impugned notice dated 02-04-2025 (Annexure P-1) issued by the ALOK SHARMA Digitally signed by ALOK SHARMA Date: 2025.07.08 18:50:11 +0530 2 Commissioner cum Preventing Authority, Raipur Division, Raipur, and the Istgasha dated 15-01-2025 (Annexure P-2), which has been filed against the petitioner under the Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1988 (in short “Act of 1988”). 2. Brief facts of the case are that a representation with documents was submitted against the petitioner before the Commissioner, Raipur Division, Raipur, under the Act of 1988, stating that the petitioner is a habitual offender of NDPS Act and engaged in illegal trafficking of narcotic drugs since 2015. He was arrested, and even after being released from jail, his activities have not stopped, and he is again involved in the trafficking of Ganja. To control the trafficking of Ganja and narcotic drugs, he may be detained in preventive detention. Istgasha was prepared on 15-01-2025, and a notice dated 02-04- 2025 was served upon him calling him to file his reply on 16-04-2025. The said notice is under challenge in the present petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that there is no sufficient evidence against the petitioner, which raises suspicion that he engaged in illegal trafficking of narcotic drugs. The satisfaction of the authority has not been recorded as to on what basis they came to the conclusion that the petitioner is involved in the trafficking of narcotic drugs. No offence is registered against the petitioner after 2022. He would further submit that the petitioner has 02 criminal antecedents of the offence under the NDPS Act, which were of the years 2015 and 2022. He would further submit that out of the two offences under the NDPS Act, one offence from 2015 has been decided, and the petitioner was acquitted; however, the 2022 offence is still under consideration before the learned trial Court, and the case is pending. The Commissioner, only on apprehension, had issued the notice for his appearance and suspected that the petitioner is engaged in illegal trafficking of narcotic drugs. There is no concrete material available to believe that he is 3 actually involved in the illegal trafficking of Ganja. There are no sources of their satisfaction, yet they have issued the notice, which adversely affects the rights of the petitioner; therefore, the impugned notice may be quashed. 4. 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 narcotic drugs /Ganja, which affects 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. Though no offence has been registered against the petitioner after 2022, it is a preventive measure under which the notice has been issued to the petitioner to prevent the petitioner from engaging in illicit trafficking in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic, which is strictly in accordance with law and needs no interference. The petitioner may appear before the authorities and may file his reply stating all the facts which he has in his defence. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents annexed with the petition. 6. 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 issued the impugned notice dated 02-04-2025. It is in furtherance of giving a proper opportunity of hearing to the petitioner before passing any order against him. The petitioner may appear before the authorities and may file his reply disclosing his defence there. If such a defence is raised, the authority would consider his 4 reply and the documents, which are to be submitted by the petitioner, in accordance with the law. At present, only a notice is issued to the petitioner, and no adverse order is passed against him. 7. Therefore, I do not find any sufficient ground to interfere with the impugned notice dated 02-04-2025 (Annexure P-1) and the Istgasha dated 15-01-2025 (Annexure P-2) and to hold that the notice issued by the Commissioner suffers from any perversity or illegality. 8. Consequently, I found no merits in the petition, and the same is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge Alok