JUDGMENT :

RAHUL BHARTI, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as for the respondents.

2. Perused the pleadings and the documents therewith.

3. The detention record produced also perused minutely.

4. The preventive detention custody being subjected to and suffered by the petitioner- Mohammad Usman Bhat has come to be assailed by him through medium of present wit petition filed through his wife Akhtar Jan Begum.

5. The petitioner is resident of village Sahora Uri, District Baramulla and was aged 51 years at the time of institution of present writ petition on 06.06.2024.

6. The District Police, Baramulla, acting through Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP) Baramulla, by virtue of a letter No. Lgl/PSA/2024/865-68 dated 06.04.2024 submitted a dossier with respect to the petitioner’s alleged activities which in the estimate of the Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP), Baramulla afforded a case for seeking preventive detention of the petitioner so as to ward off his indulgence in the activities reckoned to be prejudicial to the maintenance of security in the UT of J&K.

7. In his three and half page dossier, the Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP) Baramulla, came to refer to alleged antecedents of the petitioner as being an ex-filtrate to PoK via Sohra where the petitioner is said to have remained for four years to return to Kashmir in 2004 to start indulging in subversive activities posing a threat to the national security and integrity of the Union of India. The petitioner is said to have developed contacts with various terrorist and secessionist organizations to carry out activities of secessionism and terrorism as per the reliable and credible information/reports received from various agencies. The petitioner is alleged to be in close touch with the weapon smugglers namely Yaqoob Ahmad Kohli and Mehran Shah who also are said to have ex-filtrated to PoK in the year 1990 for obtaining illegal arms and ammunition training but not coming back to Kashmir. The petitioner is said to be getting directed from across the Border and implement the directions as per their dictation.

8. The petitioner’s state of personal liberty was reckoned, in the aforesaid background, to be potentially disruptive of then forthcoming 2024 Lok Sabha elections in District Baramulla.

9. The dossier so submitted by the Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP) Baramulla, Police was unaccompanied by any other document or material, and was, thus, a self- meaning document for the consumption of the respondent No.2- District Magistrate Baramulla to consider and take a call of subjecting the petitioner to preventive detention custody.

10. The respondent No.2- District Magistrate Baramulla, by reading of said bare dossier made the repeat of text and context of said dossier to be named as grounds of detention for the purpose of nursing a subjective satisfaction to the respondent No.2-District Magistrate, Baramulla that the petitioner rendered himself to suffer loss of his personal liberty for the sake of preventing him from acting in a manner prejudicial to the maintenance of the security in the UT of J&K.

11. On the basis of said purported subjective satisfaction, the respondent No.2-District Magistrate, Baramulla came to issue an order No.31/DMB/PSA/2024 dated 19.04.2024 thereby ordering the preventive detention of the petitioner and his confinement in the Central Jail Kot Bhalwal so as to prevent the petitioner from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of security in the UT of J&K for a period to be specified by the Government.

12. Coinciding with issuance of aforesaid detention order, the respondent No.2-District Magistrate, Baramulla, by virtue of the communication No. DMB/PSA/2024/151-155 dated 19.04.2024 addressed to the petitioner, thereby purportedly apprised him about issuance of detention order against him and his awaited detention with a right to him i.e., the petitioner to make a representation.

13. The detention warrant came to be execut