KAWALJEET SINGH ALIAS KABBU Vs. UNION TERRITORYOF J&K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner by invoking the jurisdiction of this Court in terms of Article 226 of the Constitution of India has sought the indulgence of this Court for issuance of writ of habeas corpus commanding the respondents to release petitioner from illegal detention by quashing the detention order No. PSA/105 dtd. 3/5/2021 on the following grounds:

(2.) Respondent No. 02 (District Magistrate, Kathua)has filed counter affidavit wherein it has been specifically contended, that the preventive detention is aimed at stopping the illegal activities of the individual which otherwise under common law both criminal/civil cannot be stopped;that the individual has created havoc in the society which leads to public disorder, threat to peace and stability and in certain cases also raises alarm bells regarding nation"s unity and integrity;that the petitioner falls under the category of being a threat to the public order, peace and stability in the society, thus, falling under the category of Sec. 8 of Public Safety Act, 1978; petitioner is a hardcore criminal, has been booked in so many criminal cases, has no respect for law of the land and always believes in breaking the law repeatedly,and, thus, scaring and terrorizing the people of the area;that the action against petitioner under substantive laws from time to time has not proved deterrent and the petitioner has not even mended his criminal mind., hence the order under preventive detention has been filed. It is contended, that the dossier was submitted to him for recommending the detention of the petitioner under the provisions of Public Safety Act 1978, as the petitioner is a desperate character and habitual of indulging in acts of crime and has no respect for law of the land;that as per the said dossier, it was recommended that the petitioner has an incorrigible nature and action against him under substantive laws from time to time has not proved deterrent and instead of reforming himself, petitioner has been continuously indulging in criminal activities and has scant respect for law of the land; that the detention order, notice and grounds of detentionwere read over to the petitioner/detenuein English language and explained in Dogri/local language of the petitioner, and his right to make representation was explained;that the grounds alleged by the petitioner are false, incorrect as the detenue was provided with the material, order of detention as well as the copies of dossier, contents of dossier, grounds of detention, as well as, other documents were fully explained to the petitioner in local language to enable him to make effective representation to the Government.It is lastly contended, that the executing police officer Anil Kumar, Inspector No. 046175/EXI, SHO Police Station Hira Nagar in his report has submitted that the grounds of detention were read over to the petitioner in English language and explained to him in Dogri language who gave proper receipt.

(3.) Respondent No. 03 (SSP Kathua)in his counter affidavit, has specifically stated, that the petitioner is a hardcore criminal and has been booked under many criminal cases; he has no respect for law and always believes in breaking the law repeatedly, thus, scaring and terrorizing the people of the area; detention of petitioner under preventive law is only to keep him at bay as a precautionary measure and not as punishment;that the dossier was submitted by him wherein he recommended to District Magistrate Kathua to detain the petitioner under the provisions of Public Safety Act 1978, as in his recommendation dossierhe had recommended that petitioner has an incorrigible nature and instead of reforming himself he has continuously indulged in criminal activities and has scant respect for law of the land; he has become a threat to the public order, people were scaredof him,that is the reason that the petitioner was booked under Public Safety Act 1978 because of his increased criminal activities;that the petitioner has been detained under Public Safety Act 1978 vide District Magistrate, Kathua"s order No. PSA/105 dtd. 3/5/2021 issued under endorsement No. DMK/JC/2021-22/289-96 dtd. 3/5/2021 on the ground that detenue/petitioner was first arrested in the year 2009 for his involvement in the case of theft for breaking open the locks of school in FIR No. 123/2009 U/S 457/380 RPC at P/S Rajbagh and after the investigation of the case challan was produced in the court of law and apart from this, petitioner is involved in thirteen (13) number of other criminal cases registered in different Police Stations in District Kathua, [08 in P/S Rajbagh, 04 in P/S Kathua and 01 case in P/S Hiranagar].It is contended, that the detenue is a habitual criminal, and is prejudicial to the maintenance of peace, public order and the safety of common citizens,the detention order has been issued by District MagistrateKathua and was executed by Senior Superintendent of PoliceKathua whereby the detenueis presently lodged in Central Jail KotBhalwal, Jammu;that the detention order alongwith grounds of detention order and other material have been read over and explained to the detenue in the language he understands; that the detenue was informed that he can make a representation against the detention order if he would desire so to do; the grounds of detention and other relevant material thereof were examined and considered by the Government and the detention order was further extended for a period of three (03) months vide Union Territory of J&K Govt. Order No. Home/PB-V/579 dtd. 28/7/2021;that the detenue was detrimental to the maintenance of peace and public order, detenue being notorious and habitual criminal was not likely to desist from his criminal activities which were prejudicial to the maintenance of peace and public order in District Kathua, as the application of normal law was ineffective to deter the detenue from carrying out his inimical designs, his detention under preventive Sec. of law had become necessary.