HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
MIR NASRULLAH – Appellant
Versus
UNION TERRITORY OF J AND K AND ANR. (HOME DEPARTMENT) – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1) By the medium of instant petition, the petitioner has challenged the legality and veracity of the order No.DMS/PSA/71/2022 dated 27.06.2022, issued by District Magistrate, Srinagar - respondent No.2 herein, in terms whereof, Mir Nasrullah son of Abdul Razak Mir resident of Diyarwani Batamaloo, Srinagar (hereinafter referred to as the detenue), has been placed under preventive custody and lodged in Central Jail, Jammu (Kotbalwal), for preventing him from acting in any manner prejudicial to security of the State.
2) The petitioner has contended that the allegations mentioned in the grounds of detention have no nexus with the detenue and that the same have been fabricated by the police in order to justify its illegal action of detaining the detenue. It has been contended that the grounds of detention are vague on the basis of which no prudent man can make a representation against such allegations. It has been further contended that the procedural safeguards have not been complied with in the instant case, inasmuch as whole of the material which formed basis of the impugned detention order has not been supplied to the petitioner. That the grounds of detention are non-existe
The failure to provide necessary material for effective representation against preventive detention violates Article 22(5) of the Constitution, rendering the detention order illegal.
Failure to furnish all material forming the basis of preventive detention and non-consideration of the detenue's representation against the detention amount to violations of constitutional safeguards....
Preventive detention orders must comply with constitutional safeguards, including providing all material for effective representation and considering such representations.
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.
Non-consideration of a representation against preventive detention violates Article 22(5) of the Constitution, rendering the detention order illegal.
Detention orders must comply with Article 22(5) of the Constitution, ensuring supply of grounds and consideration of representation; vagueness in grounds renders detention illegal.
The failure to supply the material on which the detention is based renders the detention order illegal and unsustainable, violating the detenue's constitutional right guaranteed under Article 22(5) o....
The failure to provide essential documents to a detenue violates Article 22(5) of the Constitution, rendering the detention order illegal.
Preventive detention orders must comply with procedural safeguards, including supplying all relevant materials to the detainee to ensure effective representation.
The failure to supply material necessary for making an effective representation against preventive detention violates constitutional rights under Article 22(5), rendering the detention order illegal.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.