Back
SINDHU SHARMA
Sahil Nisar Malik – Appellant
Versus
UT of J&K – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. The District Magistrate, Pulwama, vide order No. 69/DMP/PSA/2019, dated 19.07.2022, detained Sahil Nisar Malik, S/o Nisar Ahmad Malik, R/o New Colony, Pulwama, Tehsil and District Pulwama, under Section 8 of the Jammu and Kashmir Public Safety Act, 1978, to prevent him from acting in a manner prejudicial to the security of the State. This order of detention is challenged by the detenu through his father, Nisar Ahmad Malik.
2. The detenu has assailed the impugned order of detention on the grounds that; (a) the allegations made in the grounds of detention have no nexus with the detenu as the allegations made are vague, non-existent against which no representation can be made; (b) the Detaining Authority has not prepared the grounds of detention itself, therefore, there is total non-application of mind; (c) the detenu has not been furnished all the material relied upon by the Detaining Authority and the representation submitted by the detenu before the respondent No. 2 has not been considered; (d) the Detaining Authority has not given any compelling reasons for passing the order of detention.
3. Learned counsel for the detenu submits that the detenu was already admitted to
The obligation on the Government to consider the detenu's representation without delay as a fundamental right under Article 22 of the constitution.
The central legal point established in the judgment is that the non-consideration of a detenu's representation constitutes a violation of the constitutional right guaranteed under Article 22 of the C....
The duty of the detaining authority to inform the detenu of his right to make representation against the detention order is a crucial legal principle established in the judgment.
The detention under the Jammu and Kashmir Public Safety Act requires compelling reasons, and the detenu has a constitutional right to make a representation against his detention under Article 22(5) o....
Preventive detention must comply with Article 22(5) of the Constitution, requiring clear communication of grounds and supporting material to the detenue for effective representation; failure to do so....
Delay in considering a detenue's representation violates procedural safeguards, rendering the detention order illegal.
Detention order quashed - Rights of Detenue - Detenu had a right to move a representation to the detaining authority till detention order is approved. In present case detaining authority has failed t....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
