Back
SANJAY DHAR
Abid Hussain Ganie – Appellant
Versus
UT of J&K – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to detention order's legality. (Para 1) |
| 2. petitioner argues non-compliance with procedural safeguards. (Para 2 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. respondents assert compliance with detention procedures. (Para 3) |
| 4. court analyzes grounds for detention and constitutional guarantees. (Para 4 , 8 , 11) |
| 5. court quashes detention order. (Para 12 , 13) |
JUDGMENT :
Sanjay Dhar, J.
1. By the instant petition, the petitioner has challenged the veracity and legality of the detention Order No. 48/DMA/PSA/DET/2021, dated 25.10.2021, issued by District Magistrate, Anantnag (for brevity "detaining authority"). In terms of the aforesaid order, Abid Hussain Ganie Son of Abdul Gani Ganie Resident of Ahang Matipora District Anantnag (for short "detenue") has been placed under preventive detention and lodged in Central Jail, Jammu (Kotbhalwal), in order to prevent him from indulging in the activities which are prejudicial to the security of the State.
2. The petitioner has contended that the detaining authority has issued the impugned detention order mechanically without application of mind, inasmuch as the allegations mentioned in the grounds of detention have no nexus with the detenue and that t
Detention orders must comply with Article 22(5) of the Constitution, ensuring supply of grounds and consideration of representation; vagueness in grounds renders detention illegal.
Failure to supply all material forming the basis of the grounds of detention and non-consideration of the detenue's representation violated Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India, rendering the d....
Preventive detention orders must comply with constitutional safeguards, including providing all material for effective representation and considering such representations.
Non-consideration of a representation against preventive detention violates Article 22(5) of the Constitution, rendering the detention order illegal.
Preventive detention orders must comply with constitutional safeguards, including the right to make an effective representation, which is violated if necessary materials are not provided.
The failure to supply material necessary for making an effective representation against preventive detention violates constitutional rights under Article 22(5), rendering the detention order illegal.
Failure to furnish all material forming the basis of preventive detention and non-consideration of the detenue's representation against the detention amount to violations of constitutional safeguards....
The failure to supply the material on which the detention is based renders the detention order illegal and unsustainable, violating the detenue's constitutional right guaranteed under Article 22(5) o....
The failure to provide necessary material for effective representation against preventive detention violates Article 22(5) of the Constitution, rendering the detention order illegal.
The detention order must comply with constitutional safeguards, including the provision of necessary material for an effective representation and cannot be based on stale incidents.
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
