Preventive detention orders can be issued based on sufficient grounds, and prior revocation does not preclude new orders if circumstances warrant.

JUDGMENT :

1) The petitioner has challenged detention order No.Home/PB- V/2570 of 2022 dated 15.10.2022, issued by respondent No.2. In terms of the aforesaid order, petitioner Mubashir Majid Dar, (for short “the detenue”) has been placed under preventive detention in order to prevent him from acting in any manner prejudicial to the security of the State.

2) The petitioner has contended that the impugned order has been issued without application of mind as the allegations mentioned in the grounds of detention have no nexus with the detenue. It has been contended that the grounds of detention are vague and cryptic in nature. It has been further contended that the safeguards provided under law have not been complied with in the instant case, inasmuch as whole of the material which formed basis of the grounds of has not been supplied to the petitioner. It has been further contended that the respondents had earlier issued detention order No.DMB/PSA/05 of 2022 dated 15.04.2022 against the petitioner on the same grounds which are the subject matter of impugned detention order, which, afterwards was revoked by the respondents, but without there being any fresh grounds/allegations against the petitioner, the impugned detention order has been issued against him.

3) Upon being put to notice, the respondents appeared through their counsel and filed their reply affidavit, wherein they have disputed the averments made in the petition and insisted that the activities of detenue are highly prejudicial to the security of the state. It is pleaded that whole of the material relied upon by the detaining authority has been furnished to the detenue and the same was read over and explained to him and that the detenue was informed that he can make a representation to the government as well as to the detaining authority against his detention. It is further contented in the reply affidavit that all statutory requirements and constitutional guarantees have been fulfilled and complied with by the detaining authority and that the impugned order has been issued validly and legally. The respondents have produced the detention record to lend support to the stand taken in the counter affidavit.

4) I have heard learned counsel for parties and perused the record.

5) Although the petitioner has raised a number of grounds for impugning the detention order dated 15.10.2022, yet during the course of arguments, he has pressed into service the following grounds:

(i) That in the previous past the respondents had issued detention order No.DMB/PSA/05 of 2022 dated 15.04.2022 against the petitioner on the same grounds which are subject matter of the impugned detention order but afterwards the respondents revoked the earlier detention order and without there being any fresh grounds/allegations against the petitioner, the impugned detention order has been issued, which is impermissible in law.

(ii) That the allegations made in the grounds of detention are vague without any specific particulars, on the basis of which it was not possible for the petitioner to make a representation against his detention.

(iii) That whole of the material on the basis of which the grounds of detention have been formulated has not been supplied to the petitioner thereby violating his right to make an effective representation against the impugned order of detention.

6) So far as the first ground urged by the petitioner is concerned, a perusal of the detention record would show that vide order No.DMB/PSA/05 of 2022 dated 15.04.2022, the petitioner was sought to be detained on the ground that his activities are prejudicial to the security of the State. It seems that the said order of detention was challenged by the petitioner prior to its execution by filing a writ petition bearing WP(Crl) No.295/2022. While the said writ petition was still pending, the respondents chose to revoke the said detention order by way of Government Order No.Home/PB-V/2569 of 2022 dated 15.10.2022 passed by the respondents. Therea