Mandatory issuance of a separate detention order as per statutory provisions is essential to uphold constitutional rights.

1.Through the medium of this Habeas Corpus petition, the detention of the detenue, ordered by District Magistrate, Pulwama under the provisions of Jammu and Kashmir Public Safety Act , 1978, has been challenged. Notice in this petition was issued to the respondents on 25-7-1995. Since then, despite opportunities granted, respondents have failed to file the counter - affidavit. The petition came up for final hearing in pursuance of order dated 8-2-1996 on 20-8-1996.

2. I have heard learned counsel for both sides and perused the material on record.

3. During the course of arguments, the learned counsel for the petitioner has invited my attention to the averments made in paras 2 and 3 of the petition wherein the petitioner has averred that the detenue was arrested on 4-3-1994 by BSF personnel at Marbal, Pulwama, and that, while in custody, he was served with an undated memo styled as grounds of detention, purportedly passed in exercise of the powers conferred under the provisions of J. and K. Public Safety Act. The said grounds of detention are appended with the petition. Referring to the grounds of detention on record, learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the detaining authority in this case has passed a composite order comprising the grounds of detention as well as the order of detention. Developing his argument, the learned counsel submitted that, as a matter of fact, the detaining authority has dispensed with the requirement of S.8 of the J. and K. Public Safety Act which envisages passing of a separate order of detention on the grounds to be formulated separately. His second argument is that an order of detention can be passed only when the detaining authority is satisfied that the activities of the person sought to be detained are prejudicial either to the maintenance of public order or to the security of the State. In this case, the learned counsel argued that, the detaining authority has not disclosed anywhere in the grounds that he was satisfied that the activities of the detenue were prejudicial either to the maintenance of public order or to the security of the State.

4. To appreciate the arguments advanced at bar by learned counsel for the petitioner, it would be appropriate to quote the grounds of detention hereunder: -
" Office of the District Magistrate; Pulwama.
Sub: - Grounds of detension in respect of Mohmad Ramzan Dar S/o Mohmad Shaban Dar R/o. Marbal Tehsil and District Pulwama.
Your age is of about 40 years and are by profession a saw mill operator. You are affiliated with A1. Jahad, a banned militant organization having its Hqrs at PAK / POK. The organization has close links with ISI of Pakistan. It has sent many youths to Pakistan in order to get arms and ammunition from that place. The Org. has involved many youths within its ranks on the pretext that the party had to launch a Jahad against Indian occupation. The organization has started an armed rebellion and wants to secede the J. and K. State from Indian Union and annex it with Pakisthan. The Org. wants to overthrow the Government established by law. You are a PAK / POK trained militant of the said organisation.
Before joining militancy you was supporter of Congress. In year 1991 you was kidnapped by HM Group and was released after some time. Again after two months HB group raided to your house and demanded 02 lac rupees. You was unable to pay a huge amount to the militants. You crossed over the border in the month of Sep. 1992 via Kupwara. You then obtained training in arms and ammunition and returned to Valley in the month of Nov. 1992. You handed over the weapon to A1. Jahad group. In the month of Feb. 1993 on D. D. Khan District