1. Petitioner. Abdul Rashid Lone, through his father Ghulam Nabi Lone, has called in question, the detention Order No. DMK/PSA/43 dated: 18-09-2001. whereunder the detenue Abdul Rashid Lone came to be detained under Section 8 of the Public Safety Act for a period of 24 months from the date of his detention.

2. It is inter-alia maintained in the Habeas Corpus petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India rend with Article 103 of the Constitution of J&K that the detenue was taken into custody on 20-07-2001 in FIR No. 34/2001 of Police Station Sogam. That in the said case, the detenue was bailed out by the Court on 09-08-2001 and he was set at liberty till he was again arrested in the 3rd Week of September, 2001; that the grounds of detention were not furnished to the detenue within the period stipulated under law.

3. On admission of this petition. respondents were put to notice. Pursuant to that, respondent No. 2 has filed his counter affidavit wherein it is inter-alia admitted that the detenue came to be arrested on 20-07-2001 in FIR No. 34/2001 for offences punishable U/s 7/25 Anns Act. 4/5 Ex. P. Act. 3 Sabotage Act of P/s Sogam. Kupwara, alongwith some ammunition and arms: that the impugned detention order came to be served upon the detenne on 29-09-2001. It is further stated in reply to clause 4 of the petition, inter-alia. that the detenue has been provided grounds of detention which alone formulate the basis for his detention. No other material or record has been relied.

4. Heard Mr. I Sofi, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. R. Gadda. the Govt. Advocate, appearing on behalf of the State/respondents.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued that the detenue came to be arrested on 20-07-2001 in FIR No. 34/2001 of Police Station Sogam, for offences U/s 7/25 Arms Act, 4/5 Ex. P. Act and 3 Sabortage Act, this fact is admitted by respondent No. 2 in his counter affidavit. It is further submitted that in the said case, the detenue approached the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Kupwara, for releasing him on bail which came to be allowed by the learned Magistrate, and, accordingly, he came to be released on bail on 09-08-2001. On consideration of this argument of (he learned counsel for the petitioner, record of the police came to be perused wherein it appears that the detenue Abdul Rashid Lone came to be released on bail on 09-08-201 in FIR No. 34/2001 of P/s Sogam for offences punishable U/s 7/25 Arms Act, 3/4 Ex. P. Act and 3 Sabortage Act, by learned Magistrate, Kupwara. In this behalf, a photostat copy of the order issued by learned Judicial Magistrate Kupwara, is marked as annexure-3 to this petition, is taken note of Perusal of the record further show that the detaining authority was not made aware at the time of issuance of the detention order that the detenue was released on bail. This indicates a total non-application of mind on the part of detaining authority while passing the order of detention and vitiates his substantive satisfaction in recording the impugned order.

6. In a case titled as Anant Sakharam Ram Vs. State of Maharashtra and another. AIR 1987 SC 137. the Apex Court in para 5 to 7 have observed as under-

"We do not think it necessary to go into all the grounds urged before us by the petitioner™s counsel in support of his prayer to quash the order of detention. The one contention strongly pressed before us by the petitioner™s counsel is that the detaining authority was not made aware at the time the detention order was made that the detenue has moved application for bail in the three pending cases and that he was enlarged on bail on 13-01-1986. 14-01-1986 and 15-01-1986. We have gone through the detention order carefully. There is absolutely no mention in the order about the fact that the petitioner was an under trial prisoner, that he was arrested in connection with the three cases,that applications for bail were pending and that he was released on three succe

Click Here to Read the rest of this document