IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR
SINDHU SHARMA, J.
Bilal Ahmad Dar - Petitioner
Versus
Union Territory of J&K and Anr. - Respondents
WP(Crl) No. 462 of 2022
Decided On : 19-09-2023
Detention Order - Public Safety Act - J&K Public Safety Act, 1978, Section 8
Fact of the Case:
The detenu seeks quashing of detention Order No. DMB/PSA/2022/30 dated 27.06.2022 under the J&K Public Safety Act, 1978. The detenu challenges the legality and validity of the detention order on various grounds.
Finding of the Court:
The Detaining Authority had complied with all the statutory requirements and constitutional guarantees as provided under the J&K Public Safety Act. The detention order does not suffer from any legal infirmity, and there is no violation of constitutional or statutory provisions available to the detenu.
Issues: The detenu challenged the detention order on the grounds of fabricated allegations, non-existence of allegations, non-application of mind by the Detaining Authority, lack of relevant material for effective representation, and failure to inform the detenu of his right to make a representation.
Ratio Decidendi: The purpose of preventive detention is to prevent a person from acting in a manner prejudicial to the security of the State or the maintenance of public order. The decision of the Detaining Authority cannot be substituted by the Court while scrutinizing the detention order.
Final Decision: The petition is dismissed, and the detention record is to be returned to the respondents' counsel.
JUDGMENT :
1. In this petition, the detenu Bilal Ahmad Dar, seeks quashing of detention Order No. DMB/PSA/2022/30 dated 27.06.2022. By virtue of the impugned detention order, the District Magistrate, Budgam, in exercise of powers under Section 8 of the J&K Public Safety Act, 1978, had detained the detenu under the provisions of Public Safety Act to prevent him from acting in any manner prejudicial to the security of the State. The detenu has assailed this order of detention through his father-Farooq Ahmad Dar.
2. The detenu, aggrieved of the detention order, has challenged its legality and validity on the grounds that; (i) the allegations mentioned in the grounds of detention have no nexus with the detenu and have been fabricated to fortify his illegal detention; (ii) the allegations made in the grounds of detention are vague, non-existent against which no representation can be made; (iii) the Detaining Authority has not prepared the grounds of detention itself, therefore, there is total non-application of mind while passing the order of the detention; (iv) all the relevant material relied upon by the Detaining Authority has not been provided to the detenu enabling him to make an effective representation; (v) the detenu was not informed of his right to make a representation to the Detaining Authority or to the Government; (vi) the detention order has not been read and explained to him in the language, he understand.
3. Mr. Faheem Shah, learned Government Advocate has filed the counter affidavit and also produced the detention record. It is submitted by him that the detenu was detained vide order dated 27.06.2022 passed by the District Magistrate Budgam in accordance with the provisions of Public Safety Act. The Detaining Authority after considering all the relevant material and deriving its subjective satisfaction had passed the order of detention. The grounds of detention, order of detention and also all the material relied upon by the Detaining Authority has been furnished to the detenu. The Detaining Authority had complied with all the statutory requirement and constitutional guarantees as provided under the said Act.
4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record also.
5. The Detaining Authority has detained the detenu vide impugned order on the grounds that the detenu has been targeting innocent civilians and recruiting youth in the ranks of terrorist organizations. Report received from various agencies and blogs on social media platform testifies that terrorist organizations is being controlled by Pakistani intelligence ISI and on their advice and directions they are carrying out terrorist activities like killings offshoot targets which includes street vendors, labourers from outside J&K UT, who are working in orchards, small shops and commercial establishments, Police men who are off duty or are unarmed, so as to create an atmosphere of fear and intimidation in the valley. The activities mentioned above are not only prejudicial to the security of the State but are also aimed to recycle vicious terror atmosphere and create an atmosphere conducive for secessionists and terrorists to destabilize the administrative machinery of the UT and it hell-bent to create conducive atmosphere for terrorists for carrying out activities prejudicial to the maintenance of security of the State
6. The Detaining Authority, after considering the dossier submitted by the SSP concerned and the fact that the activity of the detenu was highly prejudicial to the security of the State, issued the detention order. The detention order approved by the Government within the time. The detenu was also informed of his right to make a representation before the Government as well as the Detaining Authority.
7. Personal liberty is one of the most precious rights guaranteed under the Constitution and a person cannot be deprived of his personal liberty except by procedure established by law. Article 22(5) of the Constitution provides for detention o
Secretary to Government, Public (Law and order) and another vs. Nabila and another
The purpose of preventive detention is to prevent a person from acting in a manner prejudicial to the security of the State or the maintenance of public order.
Preventive detention under the J&K Public Safety Act is justified when the detaining authority's subjective satisfaction is based on sufficient material, and procedural safeguards are strictly follow....
Single act of theft of telegraph copper wires in huge quantity and removal of railway fish-plates respectively, was held sufficient to sustain the order of detention.
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 necessity of the government's satisfaction for preventive detention, the objective of preventive detention to protect society, and the non-puni....
Preventive detention upheld validating detaining authority's subjective satisfaction from material on continued anti-national activities prejudicial to state security; courts do not substitute views ....
Preventive detention upheld where detaining authority's subjective satisfaction rationally based on material indicating prejudicial activities to state security; courts cannot substitute view or ques....
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.