SINDHU SHARMA
Junaid Haroon Rashid Rather – Appellant
Versus
UT of J&K – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. The present Habeas Corpus Petition has been filed by the detenu-Junaid Haroon Rashid Rather, S/o Haroon Rashid Rather, R/o Vehil Shopian, Tehsil & District Shopian through his father Haroon Rashid Rather, challenging his order of detention No. 89/DMS/PSA/2021, dated 18.10.2021, passed by the District Magistrate, Shopian, detaining him under the provisions of Jammu and Kashmir Public Safety Act, 1978, with a view to prevent him from acting in any manner which is prejudicial to the security of the State.
2. The petitioner seeks quashing of the order of detention on the grounds that; (i) the procedural safeguards provided to him under the Constitution of India and in terms of J&K Public Safety Act, have not been complied with by the Detaining Authority. (ii) the grounds on which the Detaining Authority has derived its satisfaction are vague, obscure, ambiguous and are not connected with the detenue and, as such, no effective representation can be made against these allegations, therefore, this detention bad. (iii) the detenue had moved are presentation, immediately after his detention but the same has not been considered and this has resulted in infraction of the rights gu
Sophia Ghulam Mohd. Bham v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.
Kundanbhai Dulabhai Shaikh v. District Magistrate, Ahmedabad & Ors.
The right to be communicated the grounds of detention and the material on which the grounds are based, as well as the timely disposal of the detenue's representation, are essential procedural safegua....
Point of Law : It is well settled law that even where one of grounds, relied upon by Detaining Authority to order detention, is vague and ambiguous, Constitutional and Statutory right of detenu to ma....
Procedural safeguards in preventive detention must be strictly followed; failure to provide documents and delays in representation invalidate detention orders.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the detenue must be provided with the material on which the detention order is based in order to make an effective representation against the ....
The central legal point established is the importance of promptly communicating the grounds of detention, considering the detenue's representation, and supplying all material relied upon by the detai....
The failure to provide necessary materials for representation and non-consideration of the representation violates constitutional safeguards under Article 22(5), rendering the detention order illegal....
Failure to provide necessary material and communicate representation rejection violates constitutional rights under Article 22(5), rendering detention order illegal.
Preventive detention orders must comply with constitutional safeguards, including providing all material for effective representation and considering such representations.
The failure to consider a detainee's representation and reliance on incorrect information invalidates a detention order under preventive detention laws.
The court established that the right to make an effective representation against preventive detention is fundamental, and failure to provide legible and comprehensible grounds of detention invalidate....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.