MOHD. YOUSUF MIR Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioner through the medium of instant petition throws challenge to the order No. DMS/II/271-75 dated 29th September 2009 whereby the Respondent No. 2 in exercise of powers under Section 8 of J&K Public Safety Act 1978, has ordered preventive detention of the Mohammad Yousuf Mir Son of Ghulam Qadir Mir Resident of Ratnipora Shopian at present Natipora, Srinagar (hereinafter referred to as "detenue") and directed the detenue to be lodged in Kotbalwal Jail Jammu. It appears, that the detenue was earlier placed under preventive detention vide order No. DMS/PSA/29/2008 dated 29th September 2008 (Annexure-A). The detention order was challenged in Habeas Corpus petition No. 245 of 2008, allowed by this Court on 4th February 2009 and the detenue (Annexure-C) directed to be released from custody forthwith. The detenue claims to have been re-arrested in June 2009, kept in detention in various police stations and interrogations centre's where-after the detenue vide order No. DMS/PSA/08/2009 dated 8th June 2009 dated 8th June 2009 was placed under preventive detention. The detenue once again approached this Court with Habeas Corpus petition registered as HCP No. 101 /2009. The petition was decided on 16.9.2009 (Annexure-G). The detention order was quashed and the detenue directed to be released from the custody. The detenue, allegedly was not released by the Respondents and after having been detained in different police stations, was once again put under preventive detention under the order impugned herein (Annexure H).

(2.) The detention order No. DMS/PSA/50/2009 dated 29.10. 2009 is challenged on the following grounds:

(3.) The Respondent No. 2 in his Counter Affidavit has denied that any constitutional, fundamental or statutory rights of the detenue were violated by the impugned detention order and insisted that the. activities of the detenue are highly prejudicial to the Acts Security of the State. It is stated that the grounds of detention were read over and explained to the detenue at the time of execution of order in question, in token whereof the detenue put his signatures on the detention warrant. It is further stated that the detenue was also informed about his right to make representation against his detention to the Government. The Respondent No. 2 further claimed that the preventive detention of the Petitioner/detenue was approved by the Government within the prescribed time frame whereafter the record was submitted to the State Advisory Board in compliance of Section 15 of Jammu and Kashmir Public Safety Act 1978, and that the detention was approved by the Advisory Board. The Government is said to have on receipt of opinion of the State Advisory Board confirmed the detention order.