Back
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
MOHAMMAD RAMZAN NAIK – Appellant
Versus
UNION TERRITORY OF J AND K AND ANR. (HOME DEPARTMENT) – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1) By the instant petition, veracity and legality of the detention order No.DMS/PSA/119/2022 dated 14.09.2022, issued by District Magistrate, Srinagar (for brevity “Detaining Authority”) has been challenged. In terms of the aforesaid order, Mohammad Ramzan Naik (for short “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 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 and cryptic, 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. It has also been contended that the representation of the petitioner against the impugned detention order has not been considered by
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 provide necessary material for effective representation against preventive detention violates Article 22(5) of the Constitution, rendering the detention order illegal.
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.
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....
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.
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....
Preventive detention orders must provide necessary materials for effective representation and cannot rely on stale incidents without a proximate link to current threats.
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
