Back
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
SANJAY DHAR, J
MUBASHIR MAJEED DAR – Appellant
Versus
GOVERNMENT OF J AND K AND ORS. (HOME DEPARTMENT) – Respondent
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against the petitioner on the same grounds which are the subject matter of impugned detention order, which, afterwards was revoked by the respondents, but without there being any fresh grounds/allegations against the
Preventive detention orders can be issued based on sufficient grounds, and prior revocation does not preclude new orders if circumstances warrant.
The failure to provide the detenue with necessary material for representation renders a preventive detention order illegal and violates constitutional rights.
Preventive detention orders must demonstrate independent reasoning and specificity in grounds to comply with constitutional safeguards under Article 22(5).
Preventive detention orders must provide specific grounds for effective representation; similarity in language does not imply non-application of mind by the detaining authority.
Preventive detention orders must have a clear nexus with the alleged activities of the detenue, and the detaining authority must demonstrate application of mind in framing the grounds.
Preventive detention orders must demonstrate the detaining authority's application of mind and provide specific allegations, which were upheld in this case.
Preventive detention orders must demonstrate application of mind by the detaining authority and provide necessary documents to the detenue to ensure effective representation, as mandated by Article 2....
Preventive detention orders must provide sufficient grounds and comply with procedural safeguards; failure to do so can lead to quashment.
Preventive detention orders must comply with constitutional safeguards, including providing the detenue with all relevant materials to ensure the right to make an effective representation.
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
