Excelsior Correspondent
SRINAGAR, July 30: High Court quashed three detention orders and upheld one passed under Public Safety Act (PSA) and directed the jail authorities to release them from preventive custody.
Justice Sanjay Dhar quashed the detention orders of Showkat Ahmad Bhat of Khellan Litter Pulwama, Muzamil Yaqoob Bhat of Khonmoh, Kati Mohalla, Pantha Chowk Srinagar and Yawar Ahmad Kundoo of Ganie Mohalla, Anchar Sour, Srinagar and upheld the order of detention of one Fayaz Ahmad Mir of Bumhama District Kupwara,
Mir was detained on 08.07.2020, Bhat on 25.09.2021, Yaqoob on 09.09.2021 and Kundoo on 02.07.2021 by District Magistrates of Kupwara, Pulwama, and Srinagar respectively.
Court on overall assessment on the contents of the grounds of detention of Mir, said, there has been no doubt in the mind of the detaining authority that the activities of the detenue are prejudicial to the security of the state. Thus, it is not a case where the detaining authority was in doubt as to under what category the activities of the detenue fall. Therefore, the contention of the petitioner is without any merit and deserves to be rejected.
The authorities have, in their counter affidavit, clearly denied having received any representation. Court therefore, said that the question whether representation of the detenue-Mir has been received by the respondents becomes a disputed fact which cannot be decided by this Court in exercise of its writ jurisdiction. “For the afore-stated reasons, I do not find any merit in this petition. The same is dismissed accordingly”, Justice Dhar concluded while holding the detention as valid.
Court while quashing other three detention orders said there has to be a live and proximate link between the past conduct of the detenue and the activities alleged and the said link is completely missing as the time between the order of detention and the incidents referred to in the grounds of detention is far too large to presume such a link. The impugned order of detention, therefore, cannot be sustained.
Court further added that the detenue has been hampered by non-supply of these vital documents in making a representation before the Advisory Board, as a result whereof his case has been considered by the Advisory Board in the absence of his representation, as is clear from the detention record. “Thus, vital safeguards against arbitrary use of law of preventive detention have been observed in breach by the respondents in this case rendering the impugned order of detention unsustainable in law”, reads the judgment.
Court emphasized that the detenue cannot be expected to make an effective and purposeful representation which is his constitutional right guaranteed under Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India, unless and until the material, on which detention order is based, is supplied to the detenue and the failure on the part of detaining authority to supply the material renders detention order illegal and unsustainable.
Trending Now
E-Paper
Follow our WhatsApp channel