Back
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
IRFAN AHMAD NAJAR – Appellant
Versus
GOVERNMENT OF J AND K AND ORS. (HOME DEPARTMENT) – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition through his brother-in-law thereby challenging the order of detention no. DMB/PSA/14 of 2023 dated 11.09.2023 passed by the District Magistrate Budgam whereunder the petitioner has been detained under section 8 of the J&K Public Safety Act to prevent him from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of peace and public order.
2. Besides the traditional grounds, it is urged by the petitioner for the purpose of assailing the order of detention dated 11.09.2023 that the allegations contained in the First Information Report (FIR) which have been made basis for passing the order of detention even if taken to be true on their face value, do not constitute an act which has the propensity of disturbing the public order and also that a representation dated 16.09.2023 against the order of detention was submitted by the petitioner through his brother-in-law but the same was neither considered nor the petitioner was informed about its outcome by the respondents.
3. The respondents have filed response to the petition stating therein that as per the report received from Superintendent of Police, Budgam, the petitioner is in
The failure to consider a detainee's representation and reliance on incorrect information invalidates a detention order under preventive detention laws.
Procedural safeguards in preventive detention must be strictly followed; failure to provide documents and delays in representation invalidate detention orders.
The central legal point established in the judgment is that the non-consideration of a detenu's representation constitutes a violation of the constitutional right guaranteed under Article 22 of the C....
Delay in considering a detenue's representation violates procedural safeguards, rendering the detention order illegal.
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 must comply with Article 22(5) of the Constitution, requiring clear communication of grounds and supporting material to the detenue for effective representation; failure to do so....
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
