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

2020 Supreme(J&K) 318

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT SRINAGAR
Sindhu Sharma, J.
(Through virtual mode)
Bilal Ahmad Hajam
Versus
State of J&K and another
WP(Cr1) No. 579/2019
Decided on 17-09-2020

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Wajid Haseeb, Advocate.
For the Respondents: Mr. B. A. Dar, Sr. AAG

Headnote:

Constitution of India1950 - Article-22(5) - Jammu and Kashmir Public Safety Act 1978 - Section 18 - FIR - Principal Secretary to Government Home Department - Was indulged in illegal activities leading unruly mobs damaging public property and creating large scale law & order problems with associates and whereas he and likeminded youths of area had formulated strategy for creating large scale law and order problems and to carry forwarded of secessionist elements on ground indulging in illegal activities to disrupt peace tranquility and public order- Reportedly secessionist elements had formulated strategy to subvert Government of J&K and create large scale law and order problems- y had created plan under which large scale illegal activities were being framed and to carry out such illegal activities services of disgruntled element was being undertaken by se secessionist elements and subject was forefront disgruntled element to carry out such of secessionist who were in lookout of suitable time to disrupt peaceful atmosphere –Held Detention are definite proximate and free from any ambiguity as Detaining Authority informed that he had right to make a representation in language which he understands thus with a view to prevent him from acting in any manner prejudicial to maintenance of public order Detaining Authority had detained - was clearly informed of what actually weighed Detaining Authority while passing order of detention- Detaining Authority had also informed that in order to stop him from indulging in above activities his detention under provisions of PSA was imperative as normal law was found in sufficient to stop him from indulging such activities- Thus none of constitutional and statutory safeguards has been violated after impugned detention order was passed and executed- power of detention is clearly a preventive measure- It does not partake in any manner of nature of punishment- It is taken by way of precaution to prevent mischief to community- Since every preventive measure is based on principle that a person should be prevented from doing something which if left free and unfettered it is reasonably probable he would do it must necessarily proceed in all cases to some extent on suspicion or anticipation as distinct from proof – Petition dismissed

JUDGMENT

The present petition has been filed by the detenu for quashing the detention order bearing No. DMS/PSA/131/2019 dated 26.09.2019 passed by the District Magistrate, Srinagar in terms whereof detained Bilal Ahmad Hajam S/o Late Nazir Ahmad Hajam R/o Manzmohalla, Anchar, Soura, Srinagar under Section 8(1)(a)(i) read with Clause (a) of Sub-Section (1) of Section 18 of the Jammu and Kashmir Public Safety Act, 1978, as amended in 2012, with a view to prevent him from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of the Public Order. This order of detention is challenged by the detenu through his mother.

2. The order of detention is assailed by the detenu on the grounds that;

(i) the grounds of detention have been fabricated by the police in order to justify the illegal detention of the detenu;

(ii) the allegations made in the order of detention are vague and non-existent against which no representation can be made;

(iii) the detenu had submitted representation against the order of detention but the same was not considered by the Government, as such, this has vitiated the order of detention; and

(v) the Detaining Authority has not furnished all the relevant material relied upon by it, while passing the order of detention and this had prevented him from making an effective representation which had violated his legal right.

3. Mr. B. A. Dar, learned Sr. AAG has filed the counter affidavit as well as produced the detention record. It is submitted by him that the impugned detention of the detenu was based on the subjective satisfaction of the Detaining Authority in order to prevent the detenu from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order similar to his past acts and prevented him from doing the same. The detenu was detained under the Jammu and Kashmir Public Safety Act, 1978 by virtue of order dated 26.09.2019 which is impugned in this petition.

4. It is further submitted that the grounds of detention, order of detention as well as the entire material relied upon by the Detaining Authority were furnished to the detenu within the statutory period as provided under Section 13 of the Jammu and Kashmir Public Safety Act, 1978. The case of the detenu was referred to the Advisory Board for its opinion. The Advisory Board opined that there was sufficient cause for detention of the detenu. The Government vide its order No. Home/PB-V/85 of 2019 dated 18.11.2019 had confirmed the order of detention dated 26.09.2019.

5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record also.

6. The grounds of detention reveal that the detenu was indulged in illegal activities, leading unruly mobs, damaging public property and creating large scale law & order problems with associates and whereas, he and the likeminded youths of the area had formulated strategy for creating large scale law and order problems and to carry forwarded programmes of secessionist elements on the ground indulging in illegal activities to disrupt peace, tranquility and public order. Reportedly secessionist elements had formulated strategy to subvert Government of J&K and create large scale law and order problems. They had created plan under which large scale illegal activities were being framed and to carry out such illegal activities, services of disgruntled element was being undertaken by these secessionist elements and subject was forefront disgruntled element to carry out such programmes of secessionist, who were in lookout of suitable time to disrupt peaceful atmosphere.

7. A perusal of the record reveals that all the material relied upon by the Detaining Authority had been provided to the detenu in compliance to the order of District Magistrate, Srinagar, against proper receipt. The Executing Officer, ASI Mohammad Ashraf No. 93/S of Police Station Soura handed over the contents of PSA warrants (01 leaf), notice (01 leaf), grounds of detention (02 leaves), dossier (02 leaves) and copy of FIR (02 leaves) in total (08 leaves) were also

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top