JUDGMENT :

RAJESH SEKHRI, J.

1. Challenge in this petition has been thrown to a detention order No. PSA 168 of 2025, dated 25.06.2025, issued by respondent no. 2-District Magistrate Kathua, vide which petitioner came to be detained, under Section 8 of J&K Public Safety Act, 1978 [“PSA”] and lodged in Central Jail Kot Bhalwal, Jammu.

2. Background facts of the case are that Senior Superintendent of Police, Kathua, describing the petitioner as a desperate character, habitually indulging in the smuggling of bovine animals, submitted a dossier and connected documents to District Magistrate Kahtua [“the detaining authority”] for his detention.

3. The dossier elaborated four FIRs against the petitioner viz., FIR No. 163/2022 U/S 188 IPC, 11 PC Act of P.S Ghagwal, FIR No. 12/2023 u/s 188 IPC, 11 PC Act of P/S Lakhanpur, FIR No. 27/2023 u/s 188 IPC, 11 PC Act of P/S Rajbagh & FIR No. 53/2025 u/s 331(4) 305 BNS P/S Rajbagh. It was also alleged that on 27.04.2025, Sh. Karan Singh, Lamberdar and Sh. Prithpaul Singh, Sarpanch of Halqa Panchayat had confirmed that petitioner was repeatedly involved in bovine smuggling and theft cases. It was alleged that petitioner was not only involved in organized crime but he also had close association/links with hardcore/notorious criminals and his activities created a sense of insecurity and terror in the area, with potential to disturb public order and communal harmony.

4. Petitioner is aggrieved of the impugned order inter alia on the following grounds:

(a) Because the petitioner is an illiterate as already stated in the dossier and the grounds of detention were neither read over to the petitioner nor the petitioner was made to understand the same in the language which he understands as the petitioner understands only "Gojri" and further no copy of these documents were provided to the petitioner in the language which petitioner understands.

(b) Because no copy of FIR and other documents including the Bail orders have been served upon the petitioner because only detention order has been served, therefore, in absence of the documents as relied upon by the detaining authority, the applicant has been deprived of making effective representation, therefore, the order impugned is illegal and deserves to be revoked.

(c) Because the petitioner has been detained on the basis of false and frivolous FIRs registered against the petitioner but the offences mentioned above are not covered under Section 8 of J&K Public Safety Act 1978 and in the absence of the same the impugned detention order is bad in eyes of law and is required to be revoked.

(d) Because impugned order has been passed the on the ground of involvement of the petitioner in FIR'S with respect to which the petitioner has already been enlarged on bail which have no foundation and as such, the order impugned is bad in law and deserves to be revoked.

(e) Because the detaining authority has refused to consider the representation of the petitioner and further no time limit has been communicated to the petitioner within which he was supposed to make a representation to the detaining authority and on this ground also the detention order is required to be quashed.

(e) Because the petitioner has been detained on the basis of false and frivolous FIRs registered against the petitioner and that the grounds of detention are verbatim repeat of dossier of SSP, Jammu without adding something in the dossier and therefore on this ground also the detention order is required to quashed.

(f) Because no satisfaction has been recorded by your goodself that the normal punitive law has failed to prevent the illegal activities of the applicant which renders necessary the issuance of detention order, as such, the order impugned is bad in law.

(g) Because the detaining authority by virtue of the detention order dated 25.06.2025 bearing PSA No. 168 has detained the petitioner but as per the order one Kamal @ Kaka S/o Manohar Lal R/o Khanpur Tehsil and District Pathankot was required to be d