BASHIR AHMAD WANI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner in connection with case FIR No. 222/2001 for the commission of offence punishable under Sections 3/4/5 of POTA, Section Explosive Substance Act read with Section 120-B RPC, while in custody had been detained under the provisions of Public Safety Act but later on vide Government order No. Home-270(PBV) of 2004 dated 30.1.2004, the order of detention has been revoked by the Government in exercise of the powers conferred under Sub-section (1) of Section 19 of the J&K Public Safety Act. It is only thereafter the instant petition has been field on 24.2.2005.

(2.) The first contention of the learned Counsel is that the order of discharge is the outcome of non-application of mind as the rule providing for discharge is not applicable to the Petitioner as the Petitioner has been appointed as Constable in the year 1992 when the alleged occurrence pertains to the year 2001, means he had more than eight years of service on the relevant date. It is only in case of a probationer order of discharge can be passed.

(3.) The contention raised has substance. The Rule 335 of Police Rules has beer wrongly quoted. Same does not provide for discharge, however, it provides for dismissal from service.