J.P.SINGH
Gulshad Ahmad – Appellant
Versus
State Of J. &K. – Respondent
2. Mrs. Surinder Kour, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the detenue had not been supplied the material which the District Magistrate had relied upon while directing his detention in preventive custody. This omission, according to the learned counsel, violates Section 13 of the Jammu and Kashmir Public Safety Act, 1978, rendering petitioners detention illegal besides being unconstitutional. She says that despite detenues being in. police custody in F.I.R No. 55/2006 registered under Section 7/25 Arms Act at Police Station Sogam, the District Magistrate had procedure to issue the detention order without thorn being any compelling necessity therefor. Learned counsel submits that similar detention order passed in respect of Tariq Ahmed Hajam has been quashed by this Court in HCP No. 536/2006 and in that view of the
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.