FAISAL RAMZAN MIR Vs. UNION TERRITORY OF JK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Through the medium of instant writ petition, quashment of Order No. 33 DMP/PSA/22 dtd. 16/4/2022, passed by the respondent No. 2- District Magistrate, Pulwama (hereinafter called 'Detaining Authority') in exercise of powers under Sec. 8 of the Jammu and Kashmir Public Safety Act, 1978, in terms whereof son of the petitioner namely, Faisal Ramzan Mir S/O Mohammad Ramzan Mir R/O Dadsoora Tehsil Tral District, Pulwama (for short 'detenue') was ordered to be detained and lodged in Central Jail Kotbhalwal, Jammu, has been sought.

(2.) Though the detention order has been challenged on several grounds, but the main ground taken by the petitioner is that the order has been passed without application of mind, as the allegations attributed to the detenue as per grounds of detention as also in the dossier are fabricated and have no nexus with the detenue; that the name of the detenue has been reflected in the detention order as Faisal Ramzan Dar instead of Faisal Ramzan Mir which clearly depicts non-application of mind on the part of the Detaining Authority; it has been further urged that the grounds of detention are vague, non-existent and no prudent man can make a representation against such allegations; the constitutional and statutory procedural safeguards have not been followed in the instant case, inasmuch as, the entire material which formed basis of the impugned detention order has not been supplied to the detenue.

(3.) The respondents in their counter have tried to defend the impugned detention order, stating therein that the Detaining Authority after getting satisfied on the basis of the material made available before him came to the conclusion, that it is necessary to prevent the detenue from acting in any manner prejudicial to the 'Security of State, and placed him under preventive detention. It is submitted that the detention order has been passed strictly in accordance with the provisions of J&K Public Safety Act, 1978 (for short 'the Act') and the procedural safeguards prescribed under the provisions of the Act have been followed and the rights guaranteed to the detenu under the Constitution are protected.