ABDUL RAHIM DAR Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The subject Abdul Rahim Dar while in punitive custody in FIR No. 21/03 U/s 7/25 Arms Act registered at P/s Ram Munshi Bagh, Srinagar was detained under Section 8 of J&K P.S. Act, 1978 by District Magistrate, Srinagar under his order No. DMS/PSA/109 of 2003 dated 8.3.2003 pursuant to this order the detenu was actually detained in preventive custody on 16.3.2003.The order and the detention is challanged on number of grounds. However, Ld. Counsel for the petitioner has confined his submissions to the only ground that the copy of FIR and material referred in order and grounds of detention have not been supplied to detenu, thereby he is prejudiced to make representation against the impugned order.

(2.) Mr. Wani, Dy AG submits that only the grounds of detention is relied on, Copy of which has been supplied to detenu. FIR and other material has only reference in passing the order. No other material except memo of grunds is relied upon. The detenu is not prejudiced by non-supply of any material whatsoever. Para 3 (iv) of the petition reads as under:- That from the peklrusal of the grounds of detention it is clear that the respondent No.2 has assumed satisfaction on the basis of the allegations leveled in the FIR referred in the ground of detention. It also appears that there was some other material also before the respondent No.2 while passing the impugned order. Thus the material refrred and relied by the respondent No.2 in the grounds of detention is the basis sfor passing the impugned order. The respondents were bound under law to provide the said material and copies of FIR and seizure memo and record referred and relsied in the grounds of detention of the detenu. The respondents have not provided the copies of the said documents and the material referred and relsied in the grounds of detention which has rendered him unable to make representation muchless effective one against the said order of detention. This has also violated the rights of the detenu as guaranteed to him by law.

(3.) In counter the detaining authority Dy. Commissioner, Srinagar in reply averes :- That the detention of the detenu is based on grounds of detention which reflect the activities of the detenu which on the face of it are highly prejudicial to the security of the State and warrante ddetention of the detenue under P.S. Act.