AZAD AHMAD SHAH Vs. UNION TERRITORY OF J&K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, by the medium of instant petition, has challenged the legality and veracity of order No.41/DMA/PSA/DET/2022 dtd. 29/6/2022 issued by District Magistrate, Anantnag (for brevity "Detaining Authority"), whereby he has been placed under preventive detention with a view to prevent him from acting in any manner prejudicial to the security of the State.

(2.) It has been contended by the petitioner that the Detaining Authority has passed the impugned detention order mechanically without application of mind, inasmuch as the grounds of detention are vague, non-existent on which no prudent man can make a representation against such allegations. It has been further contended that the Statutory safeguards have not been complied with in the instant case, inasmuch as whole of the material has not been provided to the petitioner. It has been further urged that there has been non-application of mind on the part of detaining authority while passing the impugned detention order which renders the impugned order unsustainable in the eyes of law.

(3.) The petition has been resisted by the respondents by filing a counter affidavit thereto. In their counter affidavit, the respondents have submitted that all the safeguards have been adhered to and complied with by the detaining authority and that the order has been issued validly and legally. It is pleaded that the detention order and grounds of detention along with the material relied upon by the detaining authority were handed over to the detenue and the same were read over and explained to him. It is contended that the grounds urged by the petitioner are legally misconceived, factually untenable and without any merit. That the detenue was informed that he can make a representation to the government as well as to the detaining authority against his detention. It is further averred that the impugned detention order has been passed after following the due procedure of law. In order to buttress the contentions raised in the counter affidavit, learned counsel for the respondents has also produced the detention record.