HC quashes PSA, orders release of detenue

Excelsior Correspondent

Srinagar, Aug 4: High Court has quashed the detention of a detenue under Public Safety Act and directed his release from the preventive custody.
The detenue Showkat Ahmad Parray challenged the order of detention passed by the District Magistrate, Budgam, in purported exercise of powers under Section 8 of the Jammu & Kashmir Public Safety Act 1978 with a view to prevent the petitioner from acting in any manner, prejudicial to the security of the State.
The court of Justice D S Thakur while setting aside the order of detention said the respondents have not produced any material, which would show reasons to justify the detention of the detenue-Tantray even when he was already in custody on the date of the passing of the order impugned. It was argued before the court that the maximum period of detention in regard to a person detained in terms of Section 8 of the Public Safety Act, is two years and since the order of detention was passed on 8th August 2019, the same was coming to an end on 8th August 2021, i.e. within this week.
The counsel appearing for the detenue urged that the order of detention suffer from total non-application of mind in as much as, the detaining authority, in its order has not at all reflected knowledge of the fact that on the date of the passing of the detention order, the petitioner was already in the custody in connection with FIR No. 137/2019 under section 7/25 Arms Act, 18,20 of ULA (P) Act, registered with Police Station Chadoora.
Court after perusal of the order impugned and the grounds of detention said it does not reflect that the detaining authority had the knowledge that the detenue was already in custody on the date when the order impugned was passed. “Not only this, the order impugned does not also reflect the likelihood of the petitioner filing a Bail Application in the FIR bearing no. 137/2019”, court said.
“The order impugned in my opinion is unsustainable in law and therefore, is set aside. The petitioner be released forthwith if not otherwise required in any other case”, Justice Thakur directed.