IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU
RAHUL BHARTI, J.
Hamid Mohd, S/o Hussain Mohd. – Appellant
Versus
Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir Through Financial Commissioner (Additional Chief Secretary) – Respondent
HCP No. 4 of 2024
Decided on : 06-08-2024
(A) Jammu & Kashmir Public Safety Act, 1978 - Section 8(1)(a) - Preventive detention - The petitioner was detained under the Act for alleged activities prejudicial to public order, but the court found the detention order unwarranted and illegal due to lack of evidence linking the FIRs to public order maintenance. (Paras 2, 20)
(B) Preventive Detention - The court emphasized that preventive detention should not be used as a shortcut to criminal procedure, and must be based on current and relevant facts. (Paras 18, 20)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner was detained by the District Magistrate based on a dossier alleging his involvement in criminal activities, but the court found insufficient evidence to justify the detention.
Findings of Court:
The preventive detention order was set aside as it was deemed unwarranted and illegal, restoring the petitioner’s personal liberty.
Issues: The main issues included whether the FIRs justified preventive detention and the legality of the detention order.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that preventive detention cannot substitute the criminal justice process and must be based on current threats to public order.
Result: The preventive detention order was set aside, restoring the petitioner’s liberty.
JUDGMENT :
01. Heard Mr. A. P. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Rajesh Thappa, learned AAG. Perused the writ pleadings along with the annexed documents. Perused the detention record produced by Mr. Rajesh Thappa, learned AAG.
02. The respondent No. 2 – District Magistrate, Jammu by virtue of an order No. PSA-25 of 2023 dated 06.11.2023 ordered preventive detention of the petitioner under section 8(1)(a) of the Jammu & Kashmir Public Safety Act, 1978 holding his alleged activities prejudicial to the maintenance of public order thereby warranting the preventive detention and lodgment in Central Jail, Kot Bhalwal, Jammu. The detention order came to be executed by Sub Inspector – Suraj Parkesh of Police Station Akhnoor on 09.11.2023.
03. Against the preventive detention so slapped upon him by virtue of the aforesaid order thereby depriving him of his personal liberty, the petitioner, acting through his brother, came forward with the present writ petition filed on 29.12.2023 challenging the detention order along with the basis thereof so as to retrieve his lost personal liberty by earning quashment of the detention order and his consequent release from the Central Jail, Kot Bhalwal, Jammu.
04. The case for seeking preventive detention of the petitioner was mooted to the respondent No. 2 – District Magistrate, Jammu by the Sr. Superintendent of Police (SSP), Jammu vide communication No.CRB/Dossier/2023/48/DPOJ dated 02.11.2023 thereby forwarding a dossier against the petitioner narrating his alleged state of activities rendering him a prospect for preventive detention under the Jammu & Kashmir Public Safety Act, 1978 for the sake of maintenance of public order. The dossier was accompanied with requisite documents related to the petitioner’s alleged prejudicial activities.
05. Acting upon the said dossier, the respondent No. 2 – District Magistrate, Jammu came to formulate the grounds of detention thereby drawing a subjective satisfaction therefrom that a case was made out against the petitioner for his preventive detention under section 8(1)(a) of the Jammu & Kashmir Public Safety Act, 1978 for the purpose of maintenance of public order.
06. In the grounds of detention, the petitioner came to be referred as a hardcore criminal, desperate character and history sheeter and habitual of indulging in smuggling of bovine animals with potential to promote feeling of enmity and disharmony among communities. The petitioner is referred to be involved in numerous criminal activities of serious and heinous nature over a period of time thereby spreading a reign of terror amongst the peace loving people of the area by which anti-social activities the maintenance of public order was found to be a risk.
07. With respect to the antecedents of the petitioner, following FIRs came to be set out in the grounds of detention being drawn from the dossier itself.
a) FIR No. 194/2017 u/s 341/323/506 P/s Akhnoor.
b) FIR No. 132/2020 u/s 188 IPC 11 PCA Act P/s Sunderbani.
c) FIR No. 02/2021 u/s 188 IPC P/s Khour.
d) FIR No. 69/2021 u/s 188 IPC 11 PCA Act P/s Nowshera.
e) FIR No. 88/2021 u/s 188 IPC 11 PCA Act P/s Manjakot.
f) FIR No. 281/2021 u/s 332/147 IPC P/s Akhnoor.
g) FIR No. 319/2021 u/s 188 IPC 11 PCA Act P/S Akhnoor.
h) FIR No. 04/2022 u/s 188 IPC 11 PCA Act P/s Dharamsala.
i) FIR No. 290/2022 u/s 188 IPC 11 PCA Act P/S Akhnoor.
j) FIR No. 23/2023 u/s 188 IPC 11 PCA Act P/S Khour.
k) FIR No. 119/2023 u/s 188 IPC 11 PCA Act P/S Akhnoor.
08. The Home Department, UT of Jammu & Kashmir by virtue of Govt. Order No. Home/PB-V/2586 of 2023 dated 10.11.2023 acing under section 8(4) of the Jammu & Kashmir Public Safety Act, 1978, came to lend its approval to the preventive detention Order No. PSA 25 of 2023 dated 06.11.2023 passed by the respondent No. 2 – District Magistrate, Jammu forwarding the case for Advisory Board’s opinion which came forward in terms of an Opinion Report dated 22.11.2023 justifying the detention of the petitioner, as a result whereof by
Preventive detention under the Jammu & Kashmir Public Safety Act must be justified by current threats to public order, not merely by past criminal activities.
Preventive detention under the Jammu & Kashmir Public Safety Act must be justified by a clear threat to public order, not merely based on past criminal activities.
Preventive detention under the Jammu & Kashmir Public Safety Act must be justified by current threats to public order, not merely past criminal behavior.
The necessity to place all material, including orders of granting bail, before the detaining authority to enable them to derive subjective satisfaction for the detention.
The distinction between law and order and public order is crucial in cases of preventive detention, and the impact on the community must be considered. The failure to respond to the petitioner's repr....
Preventive detention orders must demonstrate awareness of the detenue's custody status and cannot conflate grounds of public order and security of the State; failure to do so invalidates the order.
Preventive detention requires specific grounds and independent application of mind by the detaining authority; mere reproduction of police dossiers is insufficient.
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.