JUDGMENT

01. The present petition has been preferred by the detenue- Mohammad Ashsan Untoo S/o Late Ghulam Hassan Untoo R/o Dewar, Lolab, District Kupwara at present Kursoo, Rajbagh, Srinagar through his son Dr. Zahid Hussain, challenging his order of detention bearing No. DMS/PSA/57/2022 dated 02.06.2022, passed by the District Magistrate, Srinagar, detaining him under Section 8 of the Jammu and Kashmir Public Safety Act, 1978.

02. This order of detention has been assailed by the detenue on the ground that (i) the order of detention was passed on 02.06.2022 but the same was executed only on 28.06.2022, thus, there is a delay of 26 days in its execution and, as such, the detention order is required to be set aside; (ii) the allegations made in the grounds of detention are too vague and cryptic against which no prudent man can make an effective representation; (iii) the detenue was already in custody in FIR No. 02 of 2022, at the time when the detention order was passed but there is delay in the execution of the detention order which has vitiated the impugned order; (iv) the Detaining Authority has not furnished all the relevant material to the detenue; (v) the grounds of detention have not been prepared by the Detaining Authority itself while passing the order of detention; (vi) the detenue has been prevented from making an effective representation and was not informed of his right to make a representation before the competent authority which violates the Constitutional and Statutory rights guaranteed to him; (vii) the Detaining Authority has not shown its awareness that the detenue has been already enlarged on bail by the competent court which shows non-application of mind on the part of Detaining Authority.

03. Mr. Zahid Hussain, learned G.A has filed counter affidavit and produced the detention record.

04. The respondents submit that the detenue was detained under the provisions of Jammu and Kashmir Public Safety Act, 1978 by virtue of detention order dated 02.06.2022, passed by the District Magistrate, Srinagar. The Detaining Authority has fulfilled all the statutory requirements and constitutional guarantees and procedural safeguards as provided to the detenue. The grounds of detention, order of detention as well as entire material relied upon by the Detaining Authority while passing the order of detention has been provided to the detenue. The detenue was also informed of his right to make a representation against the order of detention. The detention order has been passed by the Detaining Authority with complete independent application of mind to the facts and circumstances of the case.

05. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record also.

06. Perusal of the record reveals that though the order of detention was passed on 02.06.2022, the same was executed only on 28.06.2022, thus, there is an unexplained delay of almost twenty six days in execution of the warrant. This, despite the fact that the detenue was already in custody in FIR No. 02 of 2022, and was enlarged on bail in the said FIR vide order dated 01.06.2022, passed by the court of learned Special Judge under NIA Act, Srinagar. There is no explanation tendered for the delay caused in execution of the detention order and this casts a shadow of doubt on the necessity of passing of the order of detention as the same has rendered its purpose irrelevant.

07. The Apex Court, while considering a similar proposition in Manju Ramesh Nahar V. Union of India and others, AIR 1999 SC 2622, where there was a delay of more than five months in executing the order, has held as under;

“8. This object can be achieved if the order is immediately executed. If, however, the authorities or those who are responsible for the execution of the order, sleep over the order and do not execute the order against the person against whom it has been issued, it would reflect upon the “satisfaction” of the detaining authority and would also be exhibitive of the fact that the immediate nece