THE SupremeCourt on Friday said, preventive detention is a serious invasion of personal liberty and the normal methods open to a person charged with commission of any offence to disprove the charge ortoprovehisinnocenceatthe trial are not available to the person preventively detained. A bench ofChiefJustice U U Lalit and Justices S Ravindra Bhat and J B Pardiwalasaidthat in view of the object of the preventive detention, it becomesveryimperative on the part of the detaining authority aswell as the executing authorities to remain vigilant and keep their eyes skinned but not to turn a blindeye in passing thedetention order.

 

“The preventive detentionis a serious invasion ofpersonallibertyandthenormalmethods opento a person charged with commission of any offence to disprove the charge or to prove his innocence at the trial are not available to the person preventively detained,” said the bench. Petitioner Sushanta Kumar Banik, detained under Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (PIT NDPS) Act, moved the apex court challenging that the Tripura High Court order, passed on June 1 this year, rejectinghis applicationquestioning the legality and validity of the detention order passed by the TripuraGovernment on November 12, 2021, and affirmed thedetentionorder. Thetopcourtnotedthatitappearsthe order of preventive detention came to be passed essentially on the ground that in the past two FIRs were registered against the appellant for the offences punishable undervarioussectionsofNDPS Act andheisa habitualoffender.“However,whatisimportant to note is that in both the cases registered under the NDPS Act, 1985, the appellant herein was ordered to be released on bail by the special court, Tripura,” it said.