2026:CGHC:17106-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPCR No. 197 of 2026 Keshav Prasad Sahu S/o. Ramu Lal Sahu Aged About 31 Years R/o. Village Kumhari, P.S.- Lawan, Distt.- Balodabazar-Bhathapara (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Secretary, Department Of Home, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar Nawa Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - The Commissioner Cum- Detaining Officer Raipur Division, Raipur Dstt.- Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Superintendent Of Police Distt.- Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) 4 - Station House Officer P.S. Lawan, Distt.- Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) ...Respondent(S) (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ For Petitioner : Shri Jitendra Chandrakar, and Shri Tarun Naik, Advocates For Respondent/State : Shri Priyank Rathi, GA --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal Order on Board Per R amesh Sinha, Chief Justice 15.04.2026 Heard Shri Jitendra Chandrakar, and Shri Tarun Naik, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Shri Priyank Rathi, learned GA, appearing for the respondent/State. Digitally signed by V PADMAVATHI Date: 2026.04.20 17:36:49 +0530 Wpcr 197 of 2026 2 1. Petitioner has filed this petition for the following reliefs: “10.1 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records pertaining to the case of the petitioner in the court of learned Commissioner Cum Detaining Officer Raipur Division, Raipur (CG) for case no.202602970100021 year 2025- 2026, for the kind perusal of this Hon’ble Court. 10.2 That this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow the petition and further be pleased to quash the order passed on dated 20.03.2026 by learned Commissioner Cum Detaining Officer Raipur Division, Raipur (CG) as case no.202602970100021 year 2025-2026, in the interest of justice. 10.3 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to pass an order to release the petitioner forthwith from the jail as he has been sent behind the bar by the impugned order dated 20.03.2026. 10.4 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief, as it may deems fit and appropriate.” 2. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner against the impugned order dated 20.03.2026 (Annexure P1) passed by the Commissioner-Cum-Detaining Officer Raipur Division, Raipur, CG in a case registered under the provisions of Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1988 (for short, Wpcr 197 of 2026 3 ‘PITNDPS Act’) alleging his prior involvement in offences under Section 20(B) of the NDPS Act and continued engagement in such activities. 3. Brief facts of the case are that a representation with documents was submitted against the petitioner before the Commissioner, Durg, Division under Section 3(1) of the PITNDPS Act. It is alleged in the representation that, the present petitioner is habitually engaged in illegal trafficking of narcotic substances in the vicinity by which the public tranquility affected and public at large are the sufferers. Certain antecedents of the same nature of offence are also there against the petitioner and he actively engaged in illegal drug trade. Considering the conduct and engagement in the illegal business of narcotic substances, a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner as to why he should not he detained in jail for his involvement in the said crime, to which he submitted his reply and appeared before the authority on 18.03.2026. After hearing the parties, the Commissioner has passed the order on 20.03.2026 and sent the petitioner in detention for three months while exercising its power under Section 3 read with Section 11 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 criminal antecedents of the offence under the NDPS Act, out of which, in one case of the year 2016, he has been acquitted by the competent Court vide its judgment dated 13.03.2017, whereas, the other case being Criminal Case No.370 of 2025, filed under Section 20B of the Wpcr 197 of 2026 4 NDPS Act, is pending consideration before the learned trial Court. He would further submit that there is no other case after 2025 against the petitioner. The Commissioner, only on apprehension, had passed the order that the petitioner is actively engaged in illegal trafficking of narcotic drugs injection. There is no concrete material available with them to believe that he actually involved in the said crime. There is no proper basis 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. 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 drugs injection 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 2025. 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. Wpcr 197 of 2026 5 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 2025 is still pending before the learned trial Court and there is information that he actively engaged in illegal trafficking of contraband drugs injection and to prevent the petitioner from engaging in such illegal trafficking of narcotic substances, the Commissioner has passed the impugned order. It further transpires from para 4 and 5 of the impugned order dated 20.03.2026 that proper opportunity of hearing was provided to the petitioner, therefore, 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 merit in the petition and the same is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice padma