Back
SANJEEV KUMAR
Zakir Hussain @ Sonu, S/o Ali – Appellant
Versus
Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir, Through Financial Commissioner, (Addl. Chief Secretary to Government), Home Department – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. The petitioner is aggrieved and has challenged his detention ordered by the respondent No.2 vide Order No. PSA/109 dated 21-05-2023, whereby the petitioner has been placed under preventive detention with a view to prevent him from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order.
2. The subjective satisfaction drawn by respondent No.2 is founded on the grounds of detention prepared on the basis of dossier supplied by Senior Superintendent of Police, Kathua, and served upon the detenue at the time of execution of the detention order.
3. The petitioner is shown to be involved in as many as ten different FIRs registered in the years 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020 and 2021 at Police Station Rajbagh Kathua and Police Station Ramnagar, Udhampur. The petitioner is allegedly involved in the commission of offences under Sections 323/341/325/147/148/120-B/201/34/427/382/457/363/ 376/109/307 RPC and 4/25/4/27 Arms Act. It is mentioned in the grounds of detention that because of his persistent and continuous involvement in the criminal activities, the petitioner has created a sense of insecurity, terror and scare in the area and is disturbing communal harmony of the are
The main legal point established in the judgment is that activities must have the potential to disturb public order by affecting the community or public at large to be considered prejudicial to publi....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the distinction between law and order and public order, and the requirement for activities to have the potential to disturb public order in order t....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the need for a direct and inevitable link between preventive detention and harm, danger, or alarm to the general public in the context of 'publi....
The court emphasized the narrow limits of preventive detention and the necessity to ensure that the facts directly and inevitably lead to harm, danger, or alarm to the public or any section thereof a....
: Preventive detention – Mere disturbance of law and order leading to disorder is not necessarily sufficient for action under Preventive Detention Laws.
The detenue's right to make an effective representation against preventive detention is guaranteed under Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India. Failure to supply the material forming the basis o....
The necessity to place all material, including orders of granting bail, before the detaining authority to enable them to derive subjective satisfaction for the detention.
The main legal point established is the distinction between law and order and public order, emphasizing that preventive detention should be reserved for emergent situations affecting public order.
The exceptional nature of preventive detention, the importance of considering vital facts, and the distinction between 'law and order' and 'public order' in the context of detention orders.
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
