A preventive detention order is liable to be quashed if it is passed with total non-application of mind, uses vague or irrelevant grounds, or fails to meet the specific statutory threshold required under the governing Act, especially when the detaining authority fails to distinguish between law and order and public order.

JUDGMENT

01. Challenge in this petition has been thrown to two orders with identical numbers and date; 27 of 2024 dated 07.06.2024, passed by District Magistrate, Jammu, under Sections 8 (1) (a) and 8 (1) (a-1) of the Jammu and Kashmir Public Safety Act, 1978, [“PSA”], vide which petitioner has been directed to be detained.

02. As factual matrix would unfold, the Divisional Forest Officer, Jammu Forest Division, [“DFO”], submitted a dossier to the District Administration alleging inter alia that petitioner being a habitual land grabber has been enlisted in the encroachment list of Jammu Forest Division for the encroachment of forest land in compartments 8/Ch and 9/Ch of Bahu Forest Range, which forms part of Bahu Conservation Reserve. It was also alleged that petitioner along with his father was also enlisted in the encroachment list of forest division for the encroachment of forest land in compartment No. 6/Ch. It was further alleged that petitioner not only encroached the forest land in Khasra Nos. 1468, 1454 and 1456, but also created hindrance and created law and order issues during the demarcation. He also made several attempts of land breaking, illegal mining on forest land etc. with the intention to encroach upon more forest land and smuggling of forest resources. He would carry illegal tasks clandestinely, especially during the night hours, by adopting the routes to give a slip to the law enforcement agencies.

03. The sponsoring authority, while alleging that petitioner was found involved in illegal construction and mulba dumping on forest land and illegal mining and smuggling of forest resources, furnished the detail of following cases against him:

(Emphasis supplied)

04. It is also allegation of the sponsoring authority that petitioner was not only involved in the encroachment of forest land, but he would carve out plots by removing the material from hillocks and levelling it, so that levelled forest land could be used for selling in the form of residential plots, keeping the citizens in dark about the status of the land and duping them of their hard-earned money, which has the potential of causing chaos and unrest among the general public.

05. On the basis of these allegations, captured in the dossier, respondent no. 2-the detaining authority has come to conclude that there was live and proximate link between past conduct of the petitioner and the imperative to detain him for the purpose of prevention and combating his activities prejudicial to the security of the State, maintenance of public safety and affording protection to society. The detaining authority propounded two orders bearing same number and date under Sections 8(1) (a) and 8(1) (a-1) of PSA, whereby petitioner has been directed to be detained.

06. Petition is aggrieved of the impugned orders inter alia on the following grounds:-

“a) That perusal of Jammu and Kashmir public Safety Act, 1978 will show that detention order can be passed by District Magistrate, if he is satisfied as prov