Back
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR
Moksha Khajuria Kazmi, J
Shahid Manzoor S/o Manzoor Ahmad Dar Dar – Appellant
Versus
Union Territory Of J&k – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. The detenue through his brother has filed the instant petition to challenge the order No. DIVCOM-K/04/2024 dated 27.01.2024, for short impugned order, in terms whereof the detenue Shahid Manzoor Dar S/o Manzoor Ahmad Dar R/o Mohalla Mir Sahib District Baramulla has been detained by respondent No. 2 under preventive detention in terms of the provisions of "Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1988" on variety of grounds taken in the memo of the petition.
2. Upon notice,; the respondents have appeared and filed their counter affidavit resisting the claim of the petitioner.
Brief Facts:
3. The detenue, a resident of Baramulla, is stated to have been arrested by Police Station Baramulla in connection with FIR No. 168/2023 for the commission of offences punishable in terms of Sections 8/21,29 NDPS Act on 23.08.2023, wherein he was admitted to bail by the competent court of jurisdiction. The detenue has subsequently been detained under the provisions of „Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1988‟ on account of his involvement in the above said FIR.
4. The detenue is stated to have been an acti
The failure to consider a detenue's representation against preventive detention violates Article 22(5) of the Constitution, rendering the detention invalid.
Point of law : words 'shall afford him the earliest opoortunity of making a representation against the order' in Article 22(5) of the Constitution suggest that the obligation of the Government is to ....
(1) Law of preventive detention must not only comply with Article 22 of Constitution, but also fulfill mandate of Articles 21 and 14.(2) Preventive detention – If consideration of representation made....
Failure to inform a detenue of their right to represent before the detaining authority and unexplained delays in processing such representations violate Article 22(5) of the Constitution, rendering p....
The right of a person subjected to preventive detention to make a representation against the detention order to the authority passing the order, as mandated by Article 22(5) of the Constitution of In....
failure to furnish the dossiers and the Police report to the detenu based on which, order of detention was issued, would have a vitiating effect on the detention order.
The detention order was unsustainable due to non-application of mind, unexplained delay in disposing of the representation, and failure to furnish necessary documents to the detenu.
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
