ABDUL NOORANI Vs. STATE OF J&K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard. Considered.

(2.) This apart, perusal of detention order reveals that the material relied upon by the detaining authority while passing detention order has not been supplied to the detenue. Perusal of the grounds of detention reveal that detenue's alleged involvement in case-FIR No. 14/96 under section 307/124-A RPC, 3/25 Arms Act; FIR No. 16/96 under section 392 RPC, 3/25 Arms Act; FIR No. 4/97 under section 307/124-A RC, 3/25 Arms Act; FIR No. 6/97 under section 307/124-A RPC, 3/25 Arms Act and a number of other criminal cases detailed in the grounds of detention heavily weighed with detaining authority while recording subjective satisfaction that the detenue was to be placed under preventive detention. The copies of FIRs or statements of witnesses under section 161 Cr.P.C. have not been, as is evident from the detention record, made available to the detenue, so as to enable detenue to convince the detaining authority and the Government that his prevention detention was unwarranted.

(3.) Furthermore, the detaining authority has not informed the detenue that independent of his right to represent against the detention to the Government, he also has a right to file representation before the detaining authority. The detention order in question thus violates Constitutional and Statutory rights available to the petitioner under Article 22(5), Constitution of India and Section 13 J&K Public Safety Act.