The court upheld the preventive detention order, affirming that the Detaining Authority's subjective satisfaction was valid and the grounds of detention were adequately communicated to the detenue.

ORDER :

N. Kotiswar Singh, J.

1. Heard Mr. B. A. Tak, learned counsel for the Appellant and also Mr. Zahid Qais Noor, learned GA for the respondents.

2. The present Appeal has been preferred against the Judgment and Order dated 31.08.2022 passed in WP (Crl) No. 107/2022 titled “Shabir Ahmad Najar vs. Union Territory of J & K & Ors.”, whereby the learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition challenging the detention of the petitioner-appellant under Detention Order No. 03/DMP/PSA/2022 dated 03.03.2022, passed by the District Magistrate, Pulwama.

3. Background facts of the case leading to the detention and present proceedings are stated briefly hereunder.

4. The detenue was arrested on 07.08.2021 by the Police in connection with FIR No. 52/2021, registered under Sections 18, 20 & 38 ULAP Act of the Police Station, Khrew. After the detenue was bailed out in connection with the aforesaid case, he was taken into preventive detention vide impugned detention order dated 03.03.2022. The said police case was registered against him after the detenue was apprehended with the assistance of security forces from Khrew, as he was found hiding in a truck bearing registration No. JK13-2357,from which, a huge quantity of arms and ammunition/explosive material was recovered. The detenue was released on bail in connection with the said case. However, before being released on bail, the detention order was served upon him.

5. Learned Single Judge after considering the rival contentions of the parties held that the detention under the J&K Public Safety Act, 1978 had been passed on the subjective satisfaction of the Detaining Authority to prevent the detenue from acting in a manner prejudicial to the Security of State, and, it is not by way of punishment and referred to a decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Haradhan Saha v. State of W. B. (1975) 3 SCC 198.

6. Learned Single Judge, on perusal of the detention record produced by the authorities also observed that it was made known that the Detention Order was made on proper application of mind based on the facts mentioned therein and, at the time of execution of the Detention Order, all the materials and grounds of detention were furnished to the petitioner appellant, and was also informed that he had a right to represent against his preventive detention, and the grounds and documents had been read over and explained to the detenue in Kashmiri language, which he fully understood, in acknowledgement of which, he put his signature unto the Execution report. Accordingly, the learned Single Judge negated the contention of the Detenue that he was not informed that he had a right to file representation against the detention.

7. Learned Single Judge also observed that the grounds of detention are definite, proximate and free from any ambiguity and the Deteune was informed with sufficient clarity of what actually weighed with Detaining Authority while passing the Detention Order by narrating the facts mentioned in the grounds of detention to the effect that the Detenue had developed secessionist and separatist ideology from the teen age and was a sympathizer of the elements who followed the same ideology, and, in the year 2017, he came in contact with a foreign terrorist who motivated him as Over Ground worker (OGW) and that he joined the banned terrorist organization, Hizb-ul-Mujahedeen (HM), and was categorized as “C” category terrorist of HM outfit vide ZPHQ letter No. ZPHQ/PS/Cat/PartVI/21/21/16732-35 dated 22.08.2021, and, that he was arrested with the assistance of Security Forces from Khrew on 08.08.2021, while travelling in a truck in which arms and ammunition/explosive material were recorded from him.

8. The Detenue was stated to have managed his release on bail. However, as per inputs from reliable sources, the Detaining Authority was satisfied that as the Detenue was likely to formulate a strategy to vitiate the atmosphere, issued the Detention Order. Accordingly, the learned Single Judge was of the vie