Excelsior Correspondent
SRINAGAR, Aug 1: High Court in a significant judgment said those responsible for National Security are sole Judges of detaining a person under Public Service Act (PSA) for preventing him from subversive actions and upheld the detention order passed under the PSA.
Justice M A Chowdhary expressed its limited scope to look into the manner in which the subjective satisfaction is arrived at by the detaining authority to order preventive detention of a person.
The court dismissed the plea of detenue-Mohammad Younis Mir of Budgam challenging the detention order passed against him in April last year in order to take him into preventive custody.
“This matter lies within the competence of the advisory board. Those who are responsible for national security or for maintenance of public order must be the sole judges of what the national security, public order or security of the State requires”, the Court observed.
Underscoring the law with regard to placing a person under preventive detention who is already in custody for an offense, the court said, preventive detention should not be ordered in such cases. The court however clarified that if the detaining authority has strong reasons to believe that the individual may be released on bail or due to his acquittal or discharge, preventive detention can still be ordered.
Court added that a detention order can be passed against a person if already in custody, the bench explained that only if there is cogent material suggesting that the detainee is likely to be released soon and that there are strong indications that they may engage in prejudicial activities upon release.
The court on perusal of the grounds of detention of detenue-Mir said it reveals that he was involved in stone pelting at encounter sites as such the detaining authority believed it necessary to prevent him from carrying out anti-national and subversive activities.
The court while examining the material on the basis of which the detenue was detained under preventive detention said, it has made basis of subjective satisfaction of the detaining authority to pass order in question against him and the court would not act as a court of appeal and find fault with the satisfaction on the ground that on the basis of the material before detaining authority another view was possible.
Trending Now
E-Paper
Follow our WhatsApp channel