The central legal point established in the judgment is that the repetition of grounds and non-application of mind by the detaining authority rendered the impugned order of detention illegal and liable to be quashed.

1. Impugned in this petition is order No. 05 of PSA 2017 dated 07.06.2017 passed by the District Magistrate, Jammu, herein respondent No. 2, whereby the petitioner, Dilbag Singh S/O Janak Singh R/O W. No. 4, Simbal Camp, Jammu, has been taken in preventive detention under section 8(1)(a) of the Jammu and Kashmir Public Safety Act, 1978 (for short the Act) in order to deter him from indulging in activities prejudicial to the maintenance of public order.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties. I have perused the record.

3. One of the grounds of challenge to the impugned order is that the petitioner has been illegally detained as he had earlier been similarly detained by virtue of Order No. 09/PSA of 2016 dated 15.07.2016, which was quashed by this Court vide judgment dated 23.03.2017 in HCP No. 04/2017 filed by the petitioner.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the impugned order of detention has been passed on the grounds, which are exactly the same on which earlier order of detention dated 15.07.2016 was passed, which was quashed by this Court vide judgment dated 23.03.2017. Learned counsel sought to point out that the impugned order of detention has been passed by the same detaining authority who passed the earlier order dated 15.7.2016 on the same grounds in total disregard to the said earlier order and the judgment of this and is, therefore, illegal, also for the reason that the same suffers from utter non application of mind by the detaining authority.

5. Copies of the impugned order of detention dated 07.06.2017 and the earlier order of detention dated 15.07.2016 have been produced on behalf of the petitioner annexure to this petition. Both these orders have been passed by the District Magistrate, Jammu, herein respondent No. 2. Respondents in their reply to this petition, which is supported by affidavit of respondent No. 2, while not denying the passing of the earlier order of detention and the judgment of this Court, however, surprisingly have not addressed and explained the factum of earlier detention of the petitioner nor have justified the impugned detention in that context. Relevant paragraphs of the petition in this behalf are paragraphs 6 and 7, which have been replied by stating that the same do not pertain to the answering respondent, that is, respondent No. 2, which is not understandable.

6. It is, thus, indisputable that the petitioner was earlier taken into preventive detention by virtue of order No. 09/PSA of 2016 dated 15.07.2016 passed by respondent No. 2. in order to “deter him from indulging in such activities which are prejudicial to the maintenance of public order.” This order was challenged by the petitioner in HCP No. 04/2017 and was quashed by this Court vide judgment dated 23.03.2017, copy whereof is annexed to this petition. By the same judgment, respondents were directed to set the petitioner at liberty. It was held by this Court:

“Thus from the above backdrop, the mandatory provisions of law have not been complied with. Respondents rejected petitioner’s representation. However, they did not convey information to petitioner as to decision taken by respondents rejecting his representation and they, in result, kept petitioner waiting for the result of representation. This unexplained and inordinate delay in communication also vitiates continued detention. Regard being had to Nihar (Nihal Kasai) v. Sukhpal Singh in Khudi Ram Das v. State of West Bangal, the Supreme Court held that one of the basic requirements of clause (5) of Article 22 is that the authority making order of detention must afford detenu earliest opportunity of making representation against order of detention and this requirement would become illusory unless there is a corresponding obligation on the authority to consideration the representation of detenu as early as possible and in the event representat