Srinagar, Sept 7: High Court today upheld the detention order of Muslim League Chairman and member of Huriyat Conference Masarat Aalam and dismissed the petition challenging his detention.
The petition was filed by relative of Masarat Aalam seeking quashing of Detention Order (no.17-DMK/PSA of 2017 dated 14th November 2017), issued by District Magistrate, Kupwara placing Alam under preventive detention and directing his lodgement in Central Jail, Kotbhalwal,
Justice Tashi Rabstan said, though violent behavior is not new, the contemporary extremism, radicalism, terrorism in its full incarnation have obtained a different character and poses extraordinary threats to civilized world. The basic edifices of a modern State, like – democracy, State security, public order, rule of law, sovereignty and integrity, basic human rights, etcetera, are under attack of such extreme, radical and terror acts.
The threat, court said, that we are facing is now on an unprecedented global scale and terrorism has become a global threat with global effects. It has become a challenge to the whole community of civilized nations. Terrorist activities in one country may take on a transnational character, carrying out attacks across one border, receiving funding from private parties or a government across another, and procuring arms from multiple sources.
“Terrorism in a single country can readily become a threat to regional peace and security owing to its spillover ramifications. It is therefore difficult in the present context to draw sharp distinctions between domestic and international terrorism. Many happenings in the recent past caused the international community to focus on the issue of terrorism with renewed intensity. Anti-fanatism, anti-extremism, antiterrorism activities in the global level are mainly carried out through bilateral and multilateral cooperation among nations. It has, in such circumstances, become our collective obligation to save and protect the State and its subjects from uncertainty, melancholy and turmoil”, reads the judgment.
After hearing both the parties at length, Court has held that it is evident that power of preventive detention was conferred by the Constitution in order to ensure that the security of the country and welfare of its people are not put in peril. “So long as a law of preventive detention operates within the general scope of the affirmative words used irrespective of entries in the Union and Concurrent Lists, which give that power and so long it does not violate any condition or restriction placed upon that power by the Constitution, the Court cannot invalidate that law on the specious ground that it is calculated to interfere with the liberties of the people. But the liberty of the individual has to be subordinate, within reasonable bounds, to the good of the people”, reads the judgment.