IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR
M.A. CHOWDHARY, J.
Zubair Ahmad Bhat – Appellant
Versus
Union Territory of J&K & Anr. – Respondents
WP(Cr.) No. 255 of 2022
Decided on : 14-08-2023
Public Safety Act - Detention - Jammu & Kashmir Public Safety Act - 13, 16, 18, 20 of Unlawful Prevention Act - The court discussed the purpose of the J&K Public Safety Act, the grounds of detention, and the legal principles related to preventive detention. The court emphasized that the detention order was made to prevent the detenue from engaging in activities prejudicial to the security of the State or maintenance of public order. The court also highlighted the subjective satisfaction of the detaining authority and the limited scope of judicial review in such cases.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner challenged the detention order passed under the Jammu & Kashmir Public Safety Act, alleging that the detenue was not supplied with a copy of the dossier and other allied material.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the detaining authority had complied with the mandate of law and that the grounds of detention were precise, relevant, and free from ambiguity. The court emphasized the limited scope of judicial review in detention cases and dismissed the writ petition.
Issues: The issues involved the compliance with constitutional and statutory safeguards in passing the detention order, the sufficiency of the grounds of detention, and the subjective satisfaction of the detaining authority.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that the purpose of preventive detention is to prevent a person from engaging in activities prejudicial to the security of the State or maintenance of public order. It also highlighted the limited scope of judicial review and the subjective decision-making of the detaining authority.
Final Decision: The writ petition was dismissed, and the respondents were found to have complied with the mandate and safeguards provided by the Jammu & Kashmir Public Safety Act.
JUDGMENT :
1. The petitioner Zubair Ahmad Bhat S/O Hamidullah Bhat R/O Okey Kulgam (for short ‘detenue’) through his father, has called in question the detention order No. 31/DMK/PSA/2022 dated 10.04.2022 (for short ‘impugned order’) passed by the District Magistrate Kulgam -Respondent No. 2 (for short ‘detaining authority’), whereby the detenue came to be detained under the provisions of the Jammu & Kashmir Public Safety Act (for short “Act”).
2. Precisely the case of the petitioner is that the detenue was arrested by the police concerned on suspicion of being involved in case FIR No. 03/2022 under Sections 307 IPC, 7/27 I.A Act and 13, 16, 18, 20 of Unlawful Prevention Act registered at Police Station Kulgam. It is further averred that the detenue was not supplied with copy of dossier and other allied material.
3. Respondents have filed their counter to the writ petition and resisted the same on the ground that the activities of the detenue were highly prejudicial to the security of the State, therefore, to prevent him from acting in such activities, he has been detained strictly in accordance with the provisions of Public Safety Act. Respondents further averred that they have followed all the constitutional and statutory safeguards while passing the impugned order of detention. It is contended that the detenue has remained active in anti-national activities. It is contended that the contents of the warrant and grounds of detention were read over to the detenue in the language he understood, and was also informed of his right to make a representation to the Government against his detention. He has in token affixed his signatures on the documents. The grounds of detention are precise, relevant and disclose the need of the hour for detaining the detenue.
4. Perusal of grounds of detention reveals that on 04.01.2023, the Police station Kulgam received information through reliable sources of presence of terrorists in the village Okay; that the troops of Army 9 RR and 34 RR, contingent of 18th Bn CRPF alongwith the police under the supervision of SSP Kulgam cordoned off the area and launched search operation; that during the search operation, civilians were evacuated with good efforts from the spot; that the terrorists hiding in the house of Hameed Bhat S/O Khazir Bhat R/O Okay, fired indiscriminately with their illegally acquired weapons upon the search party with the intention to kill them; that the search party tried to persuade the terrorists for their surrender which they refused and continued firing upon the search party; that the firing was retaliated in self-defense. On spot it was learnt that the hiding terrorists were Amir Ahmad Wani and Sameeer Ahmad Khan, who were provoking the general public to wage war through armed struggle in order to secede the UT of J&K from the Union of India; that during the course of investigation, the detenue was found involved in the commission of crime and later on was arrested in the said case; that being under custody the detenue had not abstained from seditious and unlawful activities; that it has come-fore through reliable gencies that the detenue is constantly involved in radicalization and motivation of inmates towards anti national activities to the detriment of security of the UT of J&K.
5. Perusal of the record and pleadings do disclose that the detaining authority has complied with the mandate of law and by no stretch of imagination it can be said that the detaining authority has committed any breach which would warrant interference by this Court.
6. Grounds of detention unmask that the detenue had inclination towards unlawful activities which ultimately resulted in detenue becoming a hardcore over-ground worker for terrorist outfits, and in the past he very ingeniously avoided getting incriminated openly but he was found involved in the aforementioned case registered against him.
7. The purpose of J&K Public Safety Act, 1978, is to prevent the acts and activities prejudicial to the sec
Abdul Latief Abdul Wahab Sheikh V. B.K. Jha
Sunil Fulchand Shah v. Union of India & Ors. (2000) 3 SCC 409
Subramanian v. State of T.N. (2012) 4 SCC 699
The State of Bombay v. Atma Ram Shridhar Vaidya AIR 1951 SC 157
The purpose of preventive detention is to prevent prejudicial activities, and the subjective satisfaction of the detaining authority is not open to objective assessment by a court.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the preventive nature of the detention under the Public Safety Act, aimed at preventing anti-social and subversive elements from endangering the se....
Preventive detention is aimed at preventing the commission of an offence or preventing the detained person from achieving a certain end. The satisfaction of the detaining authority for preventive det....
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.