1

WP (Crl) No. 260/2021

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU &KASHMIR AND LADAKH

AT SRINAGAR

WP(Crl) No. 260/2021

Reserved On: 26.05.2022

Pronounced on: 01 .06.2022

Tariq Ahmad Dar

…..Petitioner(s)

Through: Mr.Asif Irshad , Advocate.

V/s

UT of J&K & Ors. .

….. Respondent(s)

Through: Mr.A.S.Sodhi, Dy. AG.

CORAM:

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE, M.A.CHOWDHARY,JUDGE

JUDGMENT

1. District Magistrate, Bandipora – respondent No.2 herein, vide Order No.

08/DMB/PSA of 2021 dated 17.10.2021, has placed Tariq Ahmad Dar

S/O Gh. Mohi-ud-din Dar R/O Ahmad Nagar Shahgund, Tehsil Hajin

District Bandipora (for brevity “detenu”) under preventive detention to

prevent him from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of

public order and directed his lodgement in Central Jail Jammu . It is this

order of which petitioner is aggrieved and seeks quashment thereof.

2. Counter Affidavit has been filed by respondents, vehemently resisting the

petition. Detention record has also been produced by counsel for the

respondents to substantiate the statements made in counter affidavit.

3. Having heard learned counsel for parties and perused the file, it would be

appropriate to first go through the detention record, produced by counsel

for respondents, so as to ascertain as to whether the material, relied upon

by detaining authority while issuing impugned detention order, has been

furnished to detenu or not. The detention record, inter alia, contains

2

WP (Crl) No. 260/2021

“Receipt of Grounds of Detention”, acknowledged by detenu, as also

“Execution Report” of the detention. A perusal of “Receipt of Grounds of

Dentation”, reveals that only 05 leaves have been given to detenu.

4. From the extract of the “Receipt of Grounds of Detention”, it comes to

fore that detenu has not been furnished the material, viz. copy of FIR;

copy of Dossier; statements of witnesses; and other related documents, at

the time of execution of detention order or immediately thereafter. Same

is true about Execution Report.

5. Perusal of impugned detention order reveals that Senior Superintendent

of Police, Bandipora , vide his letter No. Lgl/PSA-10/2021/25899-904

dated 15.10.2021, produced material/ record, such as dossier in respect of

detenu and it was only after perusal thereof that impugned detention order

has been issued by the detaining authority. Grounds of detention make

reference of case FIR no.76/2021 U/S 7/27 A.Act, 302,34, 120 IPC, to

have been registered against detenu at P/S Hajin . Involvement of detenu

in the aforesaid case appears to have weighed with detaining authority,

while making detention order. The record, as noted above, does not

indicate that copies of aforesaid First Information Report, statements

recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and other material collected in

connection with investigation of aforesaid case, was ever supplied to

detenu. The above mentioned material, thus, assumes significance in the

facts and circumstances of the case.

6. It needs no emphasis, that detenu cannot be expected to make a

meaningful exercise of his Constitutional and Statutory rights guaranteed

under Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India and Section 13 of the

J&K Public Safety Act, 1978, unless and until the material on which

3

WP (Crl) No. 260/2021

detention order is based, is supplied to detenu. It is only after detenu has

whole of the said material available that he can make an effort to

convince detaining authority and thereafter the Government that their

apprehensions concerning activities of detenu are baseless and misplaced.

If detenu is not supplied the material, on which detention order is based,

he will not be in a position to make an effective and meaningful

represent