Preventive detention cannot be based on 'borrowed satisfaction' where the District Magistrate merely copies a police dossier without independent reasoning or recent factual evidence, as this violates the fundamental right to personal liberty.

JUDGMENT

01. Heard learned counsel for both sides.

02. Perused the writ record and the documents therewith.

03. The petitioner- Fayaz Ahmad Lone, acting through his father – Ghulam Qadir Lone, came forward with institution of the present writ petition on 29.05.2025 while being in a state of preventive detention custody lodged in District Jail, Rajouri and has sought restoration of his personal liberty.

04. The respondent No. 2 – District Magistrate, Pulwama, in purported exercise of power under section 8 of the Jammu & Kashmir Public Safety Act, 1978 came up with issuance of an order No. 30/DMP/PSA/25 dated 07.05.2025 thereby directing the preventive detention of the petitioner in order to prevent him from acting in a manner prejudicial to the security of the State. Issuance of this order led to arrest and detention of the petitioner on 15.05.2025 onwards which the petitioner is in continuing state of preventive detention custody which is meant to last for two years as being the maximum period prescribed under the Jammu & Kashmir Public Safety Act, 1978.

05. The respondent No. 2 – District Magistrate, Pulwama was, infact, approached by the Sr. Superintendent of Police (SSP), Awantipora with a dossier accompanying letter No. Conf/PSA/25/158-61 dated 29.04.2025 in terms whereof the alleged state of activities of the petitioner being prejudicial to the security of the State were reported for seeking indulgence of the respondent No. 2 – District Magistrate, Pulwama to order the preventive detention of the petitioner.

06. By purportedly acting upon said dossier, the respondent No. 2 – District Magistrate, Pulwama came to formulate the grounds of detention in terms whereof the petitioner came to be identified as being in close relation with terrorist organization-Jaish-e-Mohd (JeM) whose aim and object is to separate Union Territory of J&K from the Union of India and annex it with Pakistan for achieving which said terrorist organization has indulged in killing numbers of innocent people besides causing extensive damage to the public/private property. The petitioner is said to have developed separatist ideology right from his teenage which got strengthened with passage of time leading to his contact with Jaish-e-Mohd (JeM). The petitioner is alleged to be one of the loyalists of an eliminated terrorist commander –Waqas of Jaish-e-Mohd (JeM) by helping him voluntarily and enabling him to carry out subversive activities.

07. An incident of 2015 resulting in registration of FIR No. 87/2015 for alleged commission of offence under section 392 & 307 Ranbir Penal Code by the Police Station Tral relatable to the petitioner, the petitioner’s criminal antecedents have been highlighted in the grounds of detention.

08. Likewise an incident of 2019 relatable to registration of FIR No. 36 of 2019 again by the Police Station Tral involving the petitioner is also highlighted in the grounds of detention. Last incident of conflict of the petitioner with law and enforcement agency is of 18.01.2024 and 23.01.2024 by reference to proceedings under section 107 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The petitioner is said to have been warned by the concerned Executive Magistrate Ist Class by seeking a bond from the petitioner.

09. It is this narrative on the basis of which the respondent No. 2 – District Magistrate, Pulwama held that the same afforded him a subjective satisfaction to order preventive detention of the petitioner and, thus, led to the issuance of the detention order No. 30/DMP/PSA/25 dated 07.05.2025

10. The petitioner in his writ petition has assailed his preventive detention on the grounds set out in