Back
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
SHAKIR AHMAD MIR – Appellant
Versus
UNION TERRITORY OF J AND K AND ANR. (HOME DEPARTMENT) – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition through his father, thereby challenging the order of detention no. 77/DMK/PSA/2022 dated 01.12.2022 passed by the District Magistrate, Kulgam, by virtue of which the petitioner has been detained under section 8 of the J&K Public Safety Act, 1978 (for short ‘the Act’), in the interest of Security of State.
2. It is urged by the petitioner for the purpose of assailing the order of detention dated 01.12.2022 that the grounds of detention are vague, and no prudent man can make a representation against such allegations and such vague grounds cannot justify the issuance of order of detention. It is also urged that the detention order has been passed against a wrong person, as he was never arrested or bailed out in FIR No. 212/2016 and the material relied upon by the detaining authority was not provided to the petitioner to enable him to file an effective representation against order of detention. It is one of the grounds of the challenge that the petitioner submitted a representation before the respondent No.2, but the same was never considered by the respondent No.2, which renders the detention of the petitioner illegal. The
The failure to consider a detainee's representation and reliance on incorrect information invalidates a detention order under preventive detention laws.
Preventive detention orders must provide necessary materials for effective representation and cannot rely on stale incidents without a proximate link to current threats.
Failure to supply all material forming the basis of the grounds of detention and non-consideration of the detenue's representation violated Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India, rendering the d....
Preventive detention orders must comply with constitutional safeguards, including the right to make an effective representation, which is violated if necessary materials are not provided.
Preventive detention orders must comply with constitutional safeguards, including providing all material for effective representation and considering such representations.
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....
Delay in considering a detenue's representation violates procedural safeguards, rendering the detention order illegal.
The detention order must comply with constitutional safeguards, including the provision of necessary material for an effective representation and cannot be based on stale incidents.
Failure to provide translated grounds of detention and delay in considering representation violates constitutional rights, rendering the detention order illegal.
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
