- (1.) BHANWAR Singh, Abdul Mateen, JJ. These three petitions have been filed by the petitioners for a Writ in the nature of Habeas Corpus challenging the impugned Detention Orders dated 18th February, 2005 issued under the Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1988 and further for seeking their release from detention. According to the petitioners, the Detention Orders are illegal, without jurisdiction and unconstitutional. They have, therefore, prayed for quashing of the Detention Orders and for then immediate release from jail.
(2.) IT is alleged by the first two petitioners that the allegations of their being found in possession of 5 Kgs. Morphine and 700 bottles of Acetyl Chloride, each with contents of 500 milliliter, besides a sum of Rs. 25,000/-allegedly recovered from the pocket of Ram Avtar Gupta, while travelling in Tata Sumo No. HR 38 E 3720 at 4 p. m. on 14th April, 2004 were absolutely baseless. Even their arrest has been disputed and the allegation that they confessed to the commission of crime was nothing but a concocted version of the authorities. As regards the third petitioner Mohd. Tayyab, it was alleged in the Detention Order that on receipt of the information from the first two petitioners, the former's house in the Village Tikra Usma, Police Station Jaidpur, District Barabanki was raided and on search, a sum of Rs,. 7,92,000/-was recovered from an almirah. In addition, Heroine weighing 3. 5 kgs. 5. 5 kgs, Morphine, 50 kgs. Sodium Salt and 30 lts. Acetic Anhydride were also recovered. Tayyab, has, however denied the entire recovery and stated that it was only a concocted story of the authorities. Pointing out lacunas of the impugned Detention Orders, the petitioners have alleged that there was no substantive material to justify issuance of the Detention Orders nor the sponsoring authority had given cogent reasons for justifying his recommendations for detaining the petitioners. The relevant/documents on the basis of which the Detention Orders were issued were not furnished to the petitioners, despite their repeated demands. The representations moved by them to the State and Central Governments were not decided in time as a result of which the Detention Orders stand vitiated.
(3.) AS a matter of fact, the petitioners were not arrested in the way and manner as recited in the First Information Report. AS alleged, the petitioner Tayyab was arrested at 1. 30 p. m. on 13th April, 2004 from his house. A telegram in this context was dispatched to all the relevant authorities including Lucknow Bench of this Court. Copy of the said telegram was not furnished to the petitioners nor the same was placed before the competent authority, who issued the Detention Orders. It was also controverted that Tayyab was arrested from his house on 14th April, 2004 after his house was raided. It was also termed to be as wrong that 30 lts. Acetic Anhydride used for preparing heroine, 5. 500 Kgs. Morphine and 3,500 Kgs. Heroine were recovered from his house. A sum of Rs. 7,92,000/-was also recovered which was allegedly earned by him while indulging in drug trafficking. However, Tayyab has denied such recovery. All the petitioners have denied that they agreed to their search and that of their movable and immovable properties by the raiding/arresting parties. They have also stated that such recoveries were fake and imaginary. The petitioners have no criminal history and never before any contraband was recovered from their possession. It has also been alleged on behalf of all the petitioners that the sponsoring and competent authorities got the orders issued without applying their mind to any material. As a matter of fact, they have acted like a rubber stamp. The Advisory Board was not furnished with the representations of the petitioners. In these circumstances, as pleaded by them, they have prayed for quashing of the Detention Orders and for their immediate release from jail.;