ADIL AHMAD WAGAY Vs. UNION TERRITORY OF J&K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the instant petition, petitioner (wife of the detenue) challenges the order of District Magistrate, Anantnag-respondent no. 2 herein, bearing No. 45/DMA/PSA/DET/2021 dtd. 19/10/2021, whereby, Adil Ahmad Wagay S/o Mohamamd Ramzan Wagay R/o Mattan Chowk Anantnag, District, Anantnag (for short "detenue") has been placed under preventive detention to prevent him from indulging in the activities prejudicial to the security of the state and directed his lodgment in Central Jail Kotbhalwal, Jammu.

(2.) It is urged that detenue is a law abiding citizen, has never been involved in any subversive activity, prejudicial to the public order or security of the state. The detenue is the lone bread earner of his family. It is maintained that detenue was arrested in the month of October, 2021, without any rhyme or reason and was taken to Police Station Anantnag where he was detained illegally for several days and thereafter was shifted to Central Jail, Agra, to be detained under the provisions of J&K Public Safety Act in terms of the impugned order. The grounds of detention have no nexus with the detenue and the allegations made therein are vague, non-existent and no prudent man can make a representation against such an order which is based on unjustified and unreasonable grounds. It is also stated that despite attributing several allegations in the grounds of detention, no specific allegation has been made regarding the unlawful activities. The satisfaction recorded by the detaining authority suffers from complete non-application of mind on the part of detaining authority. The grounds of detention are replica of police dossier and have not been prepared by the detaining authority itself which is prerequisite for issuing a detention order. The detaining authority has acted on the dictates of police authorities and has not enquired about the existence of the facts by perusing the supporting material. The relevant material like, copy of dossier and the so-called connected material has not been furnished to the detenue, so as to enable him to make an effective and meaningful representation for recalling the order of detention. The material furnished to the detenue is not sufficient for making an effective representation, therefore, Constitutional rights guaranteed to the detenue under Article 22(5) stand infringed. It is urged that the detenue is not an English literate person and understands only Kashmiri/Urdu language but the order of detention is in English and no translated script in Kashmiri/urdu was furnished to the detenue nor were the grounds read over and explained to in order to enable him to make an effective representation. Non-supply of translated script and non-explanation of the grounds of detention has prevented the detenue from making an effective representation, thereby violating the fundamental rights of the detenue guaranteed under Article 22 of the Constitution. In post execution, the detenue was not given any opportunity to make a representation and also, was not informed about the right to make such representation which is also in violation of Article 22 of the Constitution.

(3.) The petitioner has raised several other grounds to challenge the detention order. The counsel for the detenue, however only presses aforesaid grounds of challenge.