1. Detenue Masrat Alam has been detained under Section 8 of Jammu & Kashmir Public Safety Act, 1978 ( for short the Act). Through the medium of the present petition the petitioner has challenged the order of detention issued by the District Magistrate, Srinagar under No. DMS/PSA/26/2007 dated 16.1.2008.

2. Petitioner was earlier also detained by the District Magistrate vide Order No. DMS/PSA/03/07 dated 28.4.2007. The said detention came to be challenged before this Court and by its judgment dated 1.10.2007 the court allowed the petition and quashed the detention order. The petitioner has now been detained again on almost the same grounds on which he was detained earlier.

3. The grounds of detention show that the detenu is a staunch supporter of secessionist ideology and since 1990 he is actively involved in terrorist activities which have a direct bearing upon the maintenance of security of the State. The District Magistrate has given various grounds for his detention. It is stated that on 22.4.2007 the break way group of Hurriyat Conference arranged a Public meeting at Iddgah, Srinagar, despite the fact that the permission for conducting such a meeting was not given by the District Administration. The detenue was one of the Chief organizers of the said meeting and while addressing the gathering he raised anti-national slogans and incited the general public on spot, who got provoked and resorted to anti-national slogan shouting. During his speech he challenged the accession of the State of J&K with the Union of India and asked the general public to join terrorism and rise against the so called Indian occupation. His conduct in the said meeting was criminal in nature and accordingly a case under FIR No. 70/07 U/s 13,18 ULA (P) was registered in Police Station Safa Kadal, Srinagar, which is under investigation.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the District Magistrate has passed a fresh order of detention without revoking the earlier order and that in terms of Section 18 & 19 of the Act, the District Magistrate could not have directed a fresh detention of the detenu without revoking the earlier one. He has relied on Ibrahim Bachu Bafan v. State of Gujarat AIR 1985 SC 697 and Chhagan Bhagwan Kahar v. N.L. Kalna AIR 1989 SC 1234 to show that the order of detention is not in accordance with law.

5. Respondents have not filed any reply despite several opportunities provided to them. However, detention record has been produced which shows that the order of detention has been passed by the District Magistrate, Srinagar on 16.1.2008. The record would show that the material on the basis of which detention has been directed has not been furnished to the detenue at all. Only contents of the detention warrant and grounds of detention have been read over to the detenu in Urdu/Kashmiri Langauge. Though a Photostat copy of the grounds of detention has also been served on the detenu, other material on the basis of which the grounds have been framed has not been furnished to the detenue.

6. The provisions of the Act require that the detenu should be communicated with the grounds of the detention order and the material in order to enable him to file an effective representation. In Sophia Ghulam Mohammad Bhan v. State of Maharashtra & Ors. AIR 1999 SC 3051, The Apex Court observed as under:-

The right to be communicated the grounds of detention flows from Article 22(5) while the right to be supplied all the material on which the grounds are based flows from the right given to the detenue to make a representation can be made and the order of detention can be assailed only when all the grounds on which the order is based are communicated to the detenue and the material on which those grounds are based are also disclosed and copies thereof are supplied to the person detained in his own language

It was further held that the words `grounds used in clause (5) of Art. 22 means not only the narration or conclusions of facts, but also mat

Click Here to Read the rest of this document