AB RASHID JOGGER Vs. STATE OF J&K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY the medium of this petition, the detention order bearing No. DMP/PSA/PA/12 dated 19.07.2004 passed by District Magistrate Pulwama, whereby the detenu, namely, Abdul Rashid Jogger stands detained in Kathua Central Jail, has been challenged. The challenge has been thrown on the following grounds; -

(2.) THAT the detenu was already in custody, so there was no need to detain the detenu in terms of the detention order under Public Safety Act and no compelling reasons have been set out in the order of detention; undue delay has crept in while executing the order of detention; the grounds of detention and material relied upon have not been furnished to the detenu and script of the same has not been made available to the detenu in Urdu and Gojri languages.

(3.) THE executing officer i.e. Ghulam Mohi -ud -din, ASI on back of the detention order has reported that the contents of the grounds of detention have been read over to the detenu in Kashmiri/Urdu language on 27th July, 2004. The original of the same has neither been filed with the counter affidavit nor is available on the record. But a Photostat copy of the said document is available on the record. Even the respondents have not chosen to file affidavit of the executing officer as to whether the grounds of detention have been explained in Urdu or in Kashmiri language. If it has been explained in Kashmiri language, the detenu is Gojar thus it does not mean compliance. It is not clear in which language, it has been explained. Mention has been made in para -D of the counter affidavit that the contents of the detention order were reported to have been read over and explained. What does words reported to have been  mean? Can it be held that it is compliance in terms of provisions of Jammu & Kashmir Public Safety Act?