The detenue's right to be furnished with all the material on which the detention order is based is essential for making a meaningful representation against the detention. Vague, ambiguous, and confusing grounds of detention violate the detenue's Constitutional and Statutory rights.

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Hasnain Massodi, Judge

1. Challenge in this petition is to order No. DM/DODA/PSA/2KX/63-70 dated 16.08.2010, whereby District Magistrate, Doda respondent No. 2 herein, has ordered preventive detention of Shri Irshad Ahmad Malik son of Mohd Amin Malik resident of Bharath Tehsil & District Doda (herein after referred to as 'detenue') and directed his lodgment in Central Jail, Kot Bhalwal, Jammu, must succeed for the following reasons:

1. The Constitutional and Statutory safeguards, guaranteed to a person detained under preventive detention law, are meaningless unless and until the detenue is made aware of and furnished all the material that weighed with the detaining authority while making detention order. In the instant case grounds of detention make mention of case FIR No. 167/1999 under section 7/ 27 Indian Arms Act; FIR No. 53/2010 under section 224 RPC P/S Chenani; FIR No. 05/2001 under section 307 RPC & 03 of PSSA P/S Doda; FIR No. 47/2004 under section 120-B,/ 121/ 121-A/ 122/ 123 IPC P/S S.P. Cell Colony New Delhi; FIR No. 215/2010 under section 120-B/124-A RPC and 10/ 13 Unlawful Activities Act read with Section 2 of Prevention of Insult to National Honor Act registered at Police Station Doda against the detenue. It appears that the said cases have weighed with the respondent No. 2 at the time detention order in question was made. Copies of First Information Reports, statements recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C. and other material collected in connection with investigation of aforesaid cases has not been furnished to detenue. The endorsement on the reverse of the detention order made by the Executing Officer SI Mohd Sabar No. 3722/NGO of P/S Doda, at the time of execution of detention order, does not make a reference to the documents in question and does not record that such documents were supplied to detenue at the time of execution of detention order or immediately thereafter. It is pertinent to point out that the detaining authority, in grounds of detention after detailing background in which aforesaid case was registered against detenue, proceeds to opine 'Keeping in view the above facts and circumstances, it is established that your activities are serious threat to the maintenance of the public peace, tranquility, security and integrity of the state of J&K'. The material, mentioned above, thus assumes significance in the facts and circumstances of the case. The Constitutional and Statutory Safeguards are meaningless unless and until the material on which the detention order is based is supplied to the detenue. It is only after the detenue has all said material available that the detenue can make an effort to convince the detaining authority and thereafter the Government that their apprehensions as regards activities of the detenue are baseless and misplaced. If the detenue is not supplied the material on which the detention order is based, the detenue would be in a position to make an effective representation against his detention. The failure on the part of detaining authority to supply the material relied at the time of making detention order, renders detention illegal and unsustainable. It is not necessary to burden this judgment with the detailed reference to the case law on the subject. A reference to the reported cases, mentioned hereinafter, would suffice. The principle of law, finds expression in Dhannajoy Dass versus District Magistrate AIR, 1982 SC 1315; Sofia Ghulam Mohammad Bam versus State of Maharashtra and Others AIR, 1999, SC 3051; Union of India versus Ranu Bhandari, 2008, Cri. L.J. 4567; Syed Aasiya Indrabi versus State of Jammu and Kashmir and Others 2009 (I) S.L.J 219; and Tahir Haris versus State and Others AIR 2009 SC 2184.

2. Article 22(5) of Constitution provides a precious and valuable right to a person detained under preventive detention law - J&K Public Safety Act 1978, to make a representation against his detention. It needs no emphasis that a detenue, on whom pr