Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR
MR. JUSTICE SANJAY DHAR, J
Adil Siraj Misger – Appellant
Versus
Ut Of J&k – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1) The petitioner, through the medium of present petition, has sought a Writ of Habeas Corpus for quashing the detention order bearing No.DMS/PSA/27/2023 dated 12.04.2023, passed by District Magistrate, Srinagar (the detaining authority) with a view to prevent him from acting in any manner prejudicial to the security of the State. The order is, purportedly, passed by the detaining authority in exercise of powers conferred under Section 8 of the J&K Public Safety Act, 1978 (the Act of 1978),
2) The impugned order has been assailed by the petitioner, inter alia on the following grounds:
(I) That in the previous past the detenue was placed under preventive detention pursuant to detention order bearing No.DMS/PSA/32/2022 dated 09.04.2022. The said order expired on 08.04.2023 but without there being any fresh material or grounds, the impugned detention order has been passed by the detaining authority;
(II) That whole of the material on the basis of which impugned detention order has been passed has not been supplied to the detenue thereby disabling him from making an effective representation against his detention.
(III) That the impugned order of detention is based upon stale inci
Preventive detention orders must be based on fresh grounds and provide the detenue with all relevant materials to ensure effective representation, as per Article 22(5).
Preventive detention orders must be based on current and relevant incidents, and failure to supply necessary materials to the detenue renders the order illegal.
Preventive detention orders must be based on recent conduct with a live link to current threats, and failure to provide necessary documentation to the detenue violates procedural safeguards.
Fresh grounds are necessary for passing a subsequent detention order after the earlier one has been quashed. Non-mentioning of important facts in the grounds of detention exhibits non-application of ....
Preventive detention orders must provide all relevant material to the detenue for effective representation; failure to do so renders the order illegal.
Preventive detention orders require compelling reasons when the individual is already in custody; failure to supply necessary documents violates the right to make an effective representation.
Preventive detention requires a live and proximate link between past conduct and current need to detain; stale incidents cannot justify detention without immediate threat to public order.
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
