JUDGEMENT

1. Through the medium of this writ petition, Order No.DMS/PSA/61/ 2022 dated 23.06.2022, passed by District Magistrate, Srinagar, whereby detenu, namely, Mohammad Ayoub Nadaf S/o Abdul Rouf Nadaf R/o Daribal Naidkadal, Srinagar has been placed under preventive detention with a view to prevent him from indulging in the activities which are prejudicial to the maintenance of security of the State, is sought to be quashed and the detenu set at liberty on the grounds made mention of therein.

2. The main grounds on which the detention is sought to be quashed are that the grounds of detention are vague, indefinite, cryptic, inasmuch as the detaining authority has not attributed any specific allegation against the detenu; that the detaining authority has not furnished the material including dossier, relied upon by it, to detenu to enable him to make an effective representation by giving his version of facts attributed to him and make an attempt to dispel the apprehensions nurtured by detaining authority concerning involvement of detenu in alleged activities; that the grounds of detention do not give details or particulars of terrorists to whom detenu is alleged to have met or of those who are alleged to have been given assistance by the detenu.

3. Respondents have filed reply affidavit, insisting therein that the activities indulged in by detenu are highly prejudicial to the maintenance of security of the State and, therefore, his remaining at large is a threat to the security of the State. The activities narrated in the grounds of detention have been reiterated in the reply affidavit filed by respondents. The factual averments that detenu was not supplied with relevant material relied upon in the grounds of detention, have been refuted. It is insisted that all the relevant material, which has been relied upon by the detaining authority, was provided to the detenu at the time of execution of warrant.

4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and considered the matter. I have gone through the detention record produced by counsel for respondents.

5. Taking into account the rival contentions of parties and submissions made by learned counsel for parties, it would be appropriate to go through the detention record produced by counsel for respondents. The detention record, inter alia, contains “Execution Report” and “Receipt of detention Papers”. It would be advantageous to reproduce relevant portion of “Execution Report” hereunder:

“The Contents of PSA warrant one leaf, notice one leaf, grounds of detention two leaves, copy of FIR one leaf and other allied documents in total (Six leaves) were read over and explained to the detenu in Urdu/Kashmiri languages which he understood fully. Copy of warrant, notice, grounds of detention and copy of FIR in total (5 leaves) handed over to the detenu under proper receipt….

6. It would also be relevant to reproduce relevant portion of “Receipt of Grounds of Detention” herein:

“In compliance to the Government Home Department J&K/ Divisional Commissioner Kashmir/ District Magistrate Srinagar Order No: DMS/PSA/61/2022 dated:- 23.06.2022 the grounds of detention/Notice/Letter Addressed to the Detenu/other relevant papers of detention have been served to the detenue namely Mohd Ayob Nadaf @ Raja S/O Abdul Rouf Nadaf R/O Daribal Naidkadal Srinagar at the time of execution of PSA Warrant today on 24-06-2022 consisting of (Five) leaves……”

Thus, it is unambiguously clear and evident from perusal of Execution Report and Receipt of grounds of detention that only five leaves have been given to detenu.

7. Perusal of impugned detention order reveals that on the basis of dossier placed before detaining authority by Senior Superintendent of Police, Srinagar, vide no. LGL/Det-PSA/2022/12516-19 dated 22.06.2022, detaining authority was satisfied that with a view to prevent detenu from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of security of the State, it was necessary to detain him under necessary provis