1. Subject Ghulam Ahmad Bhat while on way to Delhi with his mother was arrested at Srinagar Airport on 27.12.2001. While being so held, District Magistrate Srinagar Respondent No.2 detained him under Section 8 of the Jammu and Kashmir Public Safety Act, with a view to prevent him from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of the security of the State, under his order No: DMS/PSA/1902-05 dated:02.01.2002.Pursuant to the order he was taken into preventive detention on 14.01.2002. This order and consequent detention is under challenge in this petition.

2. The Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the detenue was not informed of his right to make effective representation and thereby his right of representation under Article 22(5) and under Section 13 of the J&K Public Safety Act is violated. The detenue was not also supplied the detention order and the grounds therefor. He was not even provided the material referred in the grounds of detention. The grounds of detention are vague and non existent and order suffers from non-application of mind.

3. The Government Advocate in reply submits that the detenue was informed of his right of representation, against detention. He was also informed that he can appear before the Board constituted under the Jammu & Kashmir Public Safety Act. He was supplied the order with grounds. As only the grounds were relied upon, therefore, no material was supplied. He appeared before the Board. He even executed the receipts, in token of receipt of the grounds as also the letter informing him of his right to make representation to the Government. The grounds are stated to be true, unambiguous and relevant. The order is stated to have been passed on due application of mind.

4. The communication DMS/PSA/1902-05 dated:02.01.2002 addressed to detenue shows that copy of grounds of detention with forwarding letter was sent to Superintendent Jail Kot-balwal Jammu for communication and delivery to the detenue against receipt. From detention file/record it is seen that the detenue has signed a memo acknowledging the receipt of the grounds of detention with letter. It further shows that the contents of the grounds of detention were read over and explained to him, which he understood. It also shows that he has been informed that he can make representation to the Government against the detention. The memo is executed by the detenue and counter signed/attested by Deputy Superintendent Central Jail Kotebalwal Jammu. It is also seen that the detenue knows and understands English. He also appeared before the Advisory Board constituted under Section 14 of the Jammu & Kashmir Public Safety Act in person and was heard by the Board.

5. The detaining authority District Magistrate has sworn the counter affidavit and has stated therein that the order and grounds were served on detenue who is an educated man and knows well English. He was also informed of his right to make representation to the Government against the detention.

6. In such circumstances, the contention that the detenue was not supplied the order and grounds and that he was not informed of his right to make representation to the Government against the order, cannot be accepted.

7. In para 8 of the petition, it is stated that the detenue was not provided material, such as copy of dossier and the material referred in the grounds of detention and therefore, he could not make effective representation to the Government

8. In counter/reply, it is stated that the detention of the detenue is based on grounds of detention alone and no other material has been relied for detaining the subject. No other record has been relied thereto. From record, it is seen that the grounds are based on the dossier/report of Senior Superintendent of Police Srinagar. No other material is on record to show that the detention is based on record or material other than the grounds for detention. Even non-supply of any or every document referred in the grounds is spoken not fatal by

Click Here to Read the rest of this document