Detainee can’t choose place of confinement: Karnataka high court

Bengaluru: Unless there are exceptional circumstances, a detainee cannot dictate the place of his/her confinement, the high court said in a recent order. Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum made the observation on April 29 while dismissing a petition filed by Irfan Pasha alias Batan, who was under detention in Central Prison, Ballari.

On April 6, additional director general of police (law and order) passed an order under Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1988, directing that the petitioner be kept under preventive detention. Based on the direction, Pasha was kept in Central Prison, Ballari.

In his petition, Pasha claimed since he is from Mysuru district, he should be transferred to Krishnarajanagar Jail (KR Nagar Jail) or Nanjangud Jail, primarily on the ground that he was suffering from ailments that required periodic medical attention. According to him, facilities would be more accessible if he was lodged in a prison nearer to his hometown.

The govt advocate, however, submitted that the petitioner had a chequered history of involvement in drug peddling since 2014, and his detention at Ballari was a conscious administrative decision intended to sever his local network and prevent recurrence of illicit activities.

Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum noted that Pasha was alleged to be involved in drug-peddling activities over a period of time. The objective of placing a detainee in prison away from his area of operation is to disrupt the chain of contacts and break the local nexus, the judge pointed out.

In the case on hand, the only ground cited was the petitioner was suffering from certain ailments and required medical attention. However, no material of such compelling nature was placed on record to indicate that adequate medical facilities were unavailable at Central Prison, Ballari, the judge added.

In the absence of any substantiated material indicating denial of such care, mere assertion of illness could not be a ground to seek transfer to another jail as a matter of right, Justice Magadum further noted.