HC Kohima Bench quashes three Nagaland PITNDPS detention orders

Morung Express News
Dimapur | September 19 

The Gauhati High Court Kohima Bench (GHCKB) has quashed three preventive detention cases under the Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (PITNDPS) Act, citing procedural violations in two cases and lack of statutory authority for an extension of detention in another.

The three judgments were delivered on September 17 by a Bench comprising Justice Robin Phukan and Justice Yarenjungla Longkumer.

The first two cases arose from Sub-Urban Police Station Case No. 008/2026, registered under Section 21(b) of the NDPS Act, involving about 55 grams of suspected heroin.

In both cases, the detenues understood languages other than English, while the grounds of detention were supplied in English.

As per the Court’s record, in the first case, the detenue understood Hindi and Adivasi, while in the second he understood Hindi and Assamese. 

The State contended that the grounds had been communicated in Nagamese, but the Court found no endorsement or other documentary material establishing that the written grounds had been communicated in a language understood by the detenues.

Referring to Article 22(5) of the Constitution and Section 3(3) of the PITNDPS Act, the Bench held that mere oral explanation of the grounds in a local language could not substitute the requirement of furnishing the written grounds in a language understood by the detenue.

Relying on the Supreme Court's decisions in Harikisan and Lallubhai Jogibhai Patel, the Bench quashed the detention, rejection and confirmation orders in both cases.

Extension held illegal
Meanwhile, another judgement on the same day by Justices Phukan and Longkumer, concerned a extension of detention, after the detenue had been detained following an NDPS case involving approximately 39 kg of suspected ganja.

The initial detention order was issued on October 27, 2025 which the Advisory Board approved on November 19, 2025.

On April 28, however, the State issued another order extending detention from April 29 to July 28 on the basis of an Additional Director General of Police’s report report, purportedly under Section 9(f).

Examining the action, the Bench held that the State Government could not extend the detention merely on the basis of the ADGP’s report without a fresh opinion from the Advisory Board.

Accordingly, the April 28 extension order was accordingly held to be without authority of law and quashed. The Court also directed payment of Rs 30,000 as compensation for the period of detention from April 29 to July 28, 2026.