TASHI RABSTAN, RAJESH SEKHRI
Hilal Rashid Khan – Appellant
Versus
Union Territory of J&K – Respondent
JUDGEMENT
Tashi Rabstan, J:
1. This Letters Patent Appeal is directed against the judgement and order dated 15th December 2022, passed by the learned Single Judge in a writ petition, being WP(Crl) no.120/2022, titled as Hilal Rashid Khan v. UT of J&K and another, and for setting-aside the same on the grounds tailored therein.
2. We have heard learned counsel for parties. We have gone through the writ record as also impugned judgement and considered the matter.
3. Assailing the impugned judgement, counsel appearing for appellant has stated that learned Writ Court while passing impugned judgement has not appreciated and considered the grounds in writ petition in its right perspective inasmuch as in ground (v) of writ petition, appellant had challenged his detention order on the ground of there being no live and proximate link between the detention order and subversive activities attributed to him. While last illegal activity alleged against appellant dates back to the year 2020, detention order does not mention any fresh illegal activity on the part of appellant to necessitate taking him into preventive detention. He also avers that the learned Writ Court also did not consider and apprec
ADM v. Shivakant Shukla (1976) 2 SCC 521
Ashok Kumar v. Delhi Administration and others
Bhut Nath Mete v. State of W.B.
Biram Chand v. State of U. P .
Borjahan Gorey v. The State of West Bengal
Debu Mahato v. State of W.B. (1974) 4 SCC 135
Dharmendra Suganchand Chelawat v. Union of India
Dharua Kanu v. State of W.B. (1975) 3 SCC 527
Dr.Rahamatullah v. State of Bihar
Gopalan A.K. v. State of Madras AIR 1950 SC 27
Haradhan Saha v. State of West Bengal (1975) 3 SCC 198
Huidrom Konungjao Singh v. State of Manipur and others
Israil S K v. District Magistrate of West Dinajpur (1975) 3 SCC 292
Jahangirkhan Fazalkhan Pathan v. Police Commissioner, Ahmedabad &ors.
K. M. Abdulla Kunhi v. Union of India
Kamarunnisa v. Union of India and another
Naresh Kumra Goyal v. Union of India and others
Rajinder Arora v. Union of India
Ram Bali Rajbhar v. State of W.B.
Rekha v. State of Tamil Nadu (2011) 5 SCC 244
Saraswathi Seshagiri v. State of Kerala (1982) 2 SCC 310
Sheoraj Prasad Yadav v. State of Bihar
State of Gujarat v. Adam Kasam Bhaya (1981) 4 SCC 216
State of Maharashtra and others v. BhauraoPunjabrao Gawande
State of Punjab v. Sukhpal Singh (1990) 1 SCC 35
Subramanian v. State of T.N. (2012) 4 SCC 699
The State of Bombay v. Atma Ram Shridhar Vaidya AIR 1951 SC 157
Union of India and another v. Dimple Happy Dhakad
Union of India v. Arvind Shergill (2000) 7 SCC 601
Detention - Not for the court to sit in the place of the Government and try to determine if it would have come to the same conclusion as the Government.
Object of the law of preventive detention is not punitive, but is only preventive.
Preventive detention under the Jammu and Kashmir Public Safety Act requires the detaining authority to provide grounds for detention and adhere to procedural safeguards, but the subjective satisfacti....
Preventive detention requires clear grounds and sufficient material to justify the detention, ensuring the detainee's right to make an effective representation is upheld.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for 'compelling reasons' to justify preventive detention, and the objective of preventive detention as intercepting and preventing ....
Preventive detention orders must be based on specific, documented grounds that are communicated to the detainee, ensuring compliance with constitutional safeguards under Articles 21 and 22.
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.