SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2010 Supreme(J&K) 501

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT SRINAGAR
Muzaffar Hussain Attar, J.
Gh. Nabi Thoker Alias Shaheen -Appellant
Versus
State & Ors. -Resopndent
HCP No. 194-2010
Decided On : 18-09-2010

Advocates Appeared:
Z.A. Qureshi, G. Mustafa.

The detaining authority must enter into subjective satisfaction before issuing a detention order, and the State has a mandatory duty to provide all procedural safeguards to the detenu as guaranteed by the Constitution and the Act of 1978.

Headnote:

Detention Order - J&K Public Safety Act 1978 - Section 8 - Article 22(4) & (5) of Constitution of India - Sections 15, 16 and 17 of the Act of 1978

Fact of the Case:

The detenu was ordered to be detained under Section 8 of J&K Public Safety Act 1978. The detention order was challenged on the grounds of being politically motivated and based on abuse of power. The State Advisory Board confirmed the detention, but it was found that the entire material was not placed before the Board, rendering the opinion and confirmation order illegal.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the detention order was quashed as the detaining authority did not apply its mind and did not enter into subjective satisfaction before issuing the detention order. The court also emphasized the importance of procedural safeguards and the duty of the State to comply with constitutional mandates and laws.

Issues: The issues revolved around the legality of the detention order, the compliance with procedural safeguards, and the subjective satisfaction of the detaining authority.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the detaining authority must apply its mind and enter into subjective satisfaction before issuing a detention order. It emphasized the mandatory nature of the duty of the State to provide all procedural safeguards to the detenu as guaranteed by the Constitution and the Act of 1978.

Final Decision: The petition was allowed, and the detention order was quashed. The detenu was ordered to be released forthwith.

1. People of our country, besides giving rights, have assigned duties to themselves. A visibly conscious decision has been taken to live by and through parliamentary democracy. The promises, rights and duties have been formulated to shape the future of the people and consequently of the country itself.

2. The letters inscribed on the book of Constitution will strike deep roots not only in the soil of the State, but the souls of the people, when its spirit is transformed into a discernable living reality.

3. The Constitutional Courts of this country have carried forward mission and vision of Constitution makers with diehard honesty and have emphasized on the fundamental unity of the country by guaranteeing to all the citizens equality before law and equal protection of laws.

4. The Constitution has to be preserved, maintained and enforced, whatever the circumstances may be. Even in extreme adverse conditions, the provisions of Constitution have to be enthused with life. It is how the role of Constitutional Courts becomes more challenging. In the fathomless ocean of the democratic countries, the Constitutional Courts act as light houses and in the desert of adversity as torch bearers.

5. The Constitution wakes up the conscience and forms bed rock of the society which is build on moral values. It is this constitutional conscience and constitutional morality which has enabled the nation to withstand all kinds of onslaughts. The faith attained by the institutions instill strength in them to iron out all kinds of differences. Indifference and insensitiveness exhibited by any organ of the State towards its people sets in frustration, which, if not addressed at the earliest, gets transformed into alienation being pregnant with disastrous consequences.

6. People harboring different ideas and thoughts when treated fairly by the organs of the state, more particularly by the judiciary, gives soothing effect to the ruffled feeling and it is this faith attained which wins over even staunch opponents.

7. The judiciary of this country is shining in the firmament of world for, uncompromisingly, protecting rights of people as ordained by the Constitution of this country.

8. Laws are never vindictive. They treat similar people similarly and afford protection to all. However, a duty is cast upon a citizen to conduct affairs in a manner which are conducive to the mandate contained in the Constitution and other laws. He is to ensure that his actions or utterances do not threaten the very existence of the State of which he is a component as with the State he will also perish.

9. Ghulam Nabi Thoker (alias Shaheen) S/o Ghulam Mohi ud din Thoker R/o Khankah Midoora Teshsil Awantipora, Tral (for short the detenu) has been ordered to be detained vide order No. DMS/PSA/42/2010 dated 17th July 2010 in exercise of powers conferred by Section 8 of J&K Public Safety Act 1978 (for short Act of 1978). It is this order which is challenged in this petition on number of grounds.

10. Respondents have filed counter affidavit and rejoinder affidavit is filed.

11. Heard ld counsel for parties. Considered the matter. Number of grounds have been taken in the petition. At the hearing of the case Mr. Qureshi ld. counsel for petitioner referred to the grounds urged in the petition in a bid to seek invalidation of the detention of the detenu.

12. Mr. G. Mustafa, Id Dy.AG vehemently argued the case and submitted that all the procedural safe-guards available to the detenu have been observed faithfully by respondents. The ld. counsel further submitted that the activities of the detenu being prejudicial to the security of the state became the cause for respondent No.2 to order for detention of the detenu.

13. In the array of respondents Senior Superintendent of Police Srinagar figure as respondent No.3. Ground (a) of the petition is reproduced as under-

"a) that the order of detention of the detenu is politically motivated and stands issued on the advice/ directions of respondent No. 3, who








































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top