Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
Vinod Chatterji Koul, J
Mohammad Yaseen Naikoo – Appellant
Versus
Union Territory of J And K And Anr. (Home Department) Mohammad Yaseen Naikoo – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. Order no. 163/DMS/PSA/2023 dated 07.02.2023 (impugned detention order) passed by District Magistrate, Shopian – respondent no. 2, (for short ‘detailing authority’) whereby detenu, namely, Mohd Yaseen Naikoo S/o Gh. Qadir Naikoo R/o Bonbazar Shopian Tehsil & District Shopian, has been placed under preventive detention with a view to prevent him from acting in any manner prejudicial to the security of the State, is sought to be quashed and the detenu set at liberty on the grounds made mention of in the instant petition.
2. Respondents have filed reply affidavit, insisting therein that the activities indulged in by detenu are highly prejudicial to the security of the State and, therefore, his remaining at large is a threat to the security of State. The activities narrated in the grounds of detention have been reiterated in the reply affidavit filed by respondents. The factual averments that detenu was not supplied with relevant material relied upon in the grounds of detention have been refuted. It is insisted that all the relevant material, which has been relied upon by the detaining authority, was provided to the detenu at the time of execution of warrant. 3. I have heard
Non-consideration of a detenu's representation against preventive detention violates Article 22(5) of the Constitution, rendering the detention unconstitutional.
Preventive detention orders must provide necessary materials for effective representation and cannot rely on stale incidents without a proximate link to current threats.
Preventive detention orders must comply with constitutional safeguards, including providing all material for effective representation and considering such representations.
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 consider a detainee's representation and reliance on incorrect information invalidates a detention order under preventive detention laws.
Delay in considering a detenue's representation violates procedural safeguards, rendering the detention order illegal.
Failure to provide translated grounds of detention and delay in considering representation violates constitutional rights, rendering the detention order illegal.
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
