GHULAM QADIR KAWA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CHALLENGE to order No.DMB/PSA/61 OF 2011 dated 29.07.2011, of District Magistrate, Budgam respondent No.2 herein, whereby one Shri Ghulam Qadir Kawa (Qadir Kawa) son of Mama Kawa resident of Kanidajan Tehsil Charari Sharief District Budgam (herein after referred to as detenue) has been placed under preventive detention, must succeed for following reasons:

(2.) IN the instant case the detenue is alleged to have been guiding smugglers groups in felling green trees, converting these trees into logs/Phads by use of axes and sawing, fashioning these to Phads and transporting this illegal material to Payeen belt on horses/ponies. The grounds of detention do not give the particulars of smugglers groups, who are alleged to have been guided by detenue in felling green trees, nor particulars of those areas have been given, wherefrom the detenue is alleged to have been transporting the logs/Phads. The detenue, in absence of such details, could not be expected to have been in a position to give his side of story and persuade the Detaining Authority and other respondents that the allegations against the detenue were bereft of any basis. The grounds of detention that constitute basis for the detention order in question are ambiguous, vague, uncertain and hazy. A person of ordinary prudence would not be in a position to explain his stand in reply to the grounds of detention detailed by the detaining authority. The detenue has been kept guessing about the facts and events that weighed with the detaining authority and prompted detaining authority to record subjective satisfaction regarding sufficiency of the material to warrant preventive detention of the detenue. These are only few instances to illustrate that the grounds of detention are vague and ambiguous and bound to keep the detenue guessing about what really was intended to be conveyed by the detaining authority. It is well settled law that even where one of the grounds relied upon by the Detaining Authority to order detention is vague and ambiguous, Constitutional and Statutory right of the detenue to make a representation against his detention are taken to have been violated.

(3.) THE respondents, in view of quashment of detention order, are stripped of any authority to detain the detenue under order No.DMB/PSA/61 OF 2011 dated 29.07.2011. Resultantly, the respondents are directed to release the detenue from preventive detention, ordered vide order No.DMB/PSA/61 OF 2011 dated 29.07.2011.