Newspaper Articles

1. HC orders immediate closure of unlawful de-addiction centres1

It said that while shutting down such a centre, the inmates in need of rehabilitation should be
provided treatment in a state-authorised establishment and those detained there without their
consent be given all assistance to reach their destination of choice.

The court was hearing a habeas corpus plea moved by the brother and father of a man who
was allegedly illegally detained at a city de-addiction centre where he was admitted by his
wife and children on the pretext that he was an alcoholic.
2. De-addiction centres not to be used to forcibly detain persons: HC2
De-addiction centres should not be used to detain persons without their consent, under the
guise of rehabilitation, the Delhi High Court today observed.

The court said that due to shortage of government-run facilities to address the problem of de-
addiction, large number of such private centres had come up, giving rise to the problem of
alleged detention of people.

3. HC orders immediate closure of unlawful de-addiction centres3

On the last date of hearing, Delhi government standing counsel Rahul Mehra and advocate
Tushar Sannu told the bench that the Health department would work as the nodal agency for
drawing up a regulatory framework for running of de-addiction and rehabilitation centres.
The court was hearing a habeas corpus plea moved by the brother and father of a man who
was allegedly illegally detained at a city de-addiction centre where he was admitted by his
wife and children on the pretext that he was an alcoholic.
4. Check if pvt de-addiction centres detaining people4

The court set up a three-member team for each corporation zone comprising two legal service
lawyers and one deputy health officer to inspect each such centre and find out if any inmate
has been detained against his/her wish. The team will also note, HC specified, “the condition

1 https://www.indiatoday.in/pti-feed/story/hc-orders-immediate-closure-of-unlawful-de-addiction-centres-
1083162-2017-11-09.
2 https://www.outlookindia.com/newsscroll/deaddiction-centres-not-to-be-used-to-forcibly-detain-persons-
hc/1300939.
3 https://www.indiatoday.in/pti-feed/story/hc-orders-immediate-closure-of-unlawful-de-addiction-centres-
1083162-2017-11-09.
4 https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/delhi/check-if-pvt-de-addiction-centres-detaining-
people/articleshow/64035776.cms.
of the centre and the adequacy of the infrastructure and facilities therein for providing a
minimum standard of treatment and care, the treatment currently received by such inmates
and the name of the medical professional under whose supervision such treatment is taking
place. The team will also make an assessment of the capacity of the inmate to consent for
treatment.”

5. Private de-addiction centres to shut down till city gets a regulatory policy5

The absence of a policy was noticed when the high court examined the case of Vinod Kumar,
who said he had been admitted to a de-addiction centre in Rama Vihar in west Delhi by his
son against his wishes. In his absence, the son forced his mother to give him ₹10 lakh,
according to court documents.
“As of now, there is no legal framework in place in the NCT of Delhi for running de-
addiction centres. There are no norms in place for the purposes of licensing such centres. It is
inconceivable that private persons/entities, without any oversight of the state, are given the
charge and custody of adult individuals without the consent of such adult individuals,” the
court had said in its order.
6. De-addiction centres not to be used to forcibly detain persons: HC6

De-addiction centres should not be used to detain persons without their consent, under the
guise of rehabilitation, the Delhi High Court today observed.

The court said that due to shortage of government-run facilities to address the problem of de-
addiction, large number of such private centres had come up, giving rise to the problem of
alleged detention of people.

Case

Miss. Ezlinda Fernandes v. Chetan Sanghi (1997) 4 Bom CR 641, the Bombay High Court
found that the Petitioner had been detained in the Institute of Psychiatric and Human
Behaviour illegally and arbitrarily from 7th October to 6th November, 1991. Since the MHA
had not been notified, the Court dealt with the corresponding provisions under the ILA. In
this case, despite a no objection certificate having been issued by the doctor in-charge, the
Petitioner was not released from the hospital immediately. It was then observed,

5 https://www.pressreader.com/india/hindustan-times-delhi/20180402/281663960567834.
6 https://www.business-standard.com/article/pti-stories/de-addiction-centres-not-to-be-used-to-forcibly-
detain-persons-hc-118050301531_1.html
No one can be detained in a hospital against his or her wish even for a day. We have no doubt
in our mind that the petitioner was detained in the said hospital without authority of law in
any event on and after 1st November 1991. By reason of such wrongful and illegal detention,
the fundamental rights of the petitioner guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of
India were undoubtedly infringed. The respondent No. 4 institute is a Govt. institute and is
State within meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India. The State is liable to pay
reasonable compensation to the petitioner for infraction of her fundamental right under
Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

For the case of Ravinder vs Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors., the judgement has been attached.