RAGHBIR SINGH Vs. STATE OF J AND K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner Raghbir Singh by this Habeas-Corpus Petition has challenged the detention of his son Jung Bahadur Singh, who has been detained under S. 8 of the Jammu and Kashmir Public Safety Act, 1978 as stood amended (hereinafter called the Act) by District Magistrate, Baramulla vide his Order No. 9 of 1985 dt. 24-2-1985 communicated to the detenue Jangh Bahadur Singh vide No. DM/B/PSA/19/85 dated 28-2-1985 along with the grounds of detention in English as well as in Urdu language served on the detenu on 1-3-1985 under receipt, which is on record of the District Magistrate, which has been placed before me by the learned Government Advocate at the time of hearing.

(2.) The petitioner in his petition has submitted that the detenu was arrested by S.P.C.I.D., Srinagar on 14th of Jan. 1985, of whom the whereabouts were not known to him despite enquiry from S. P., Baramulla, thus he was compelled to file a Habeas Corpus Petition before this Court on 30th of January, 1985. The said petition was registered as number 22 of 1985, which is also annexed with the present petition and stands disposed of as the same has become infructuous vide order passed by this court on 6th of April, 1985 on account of the detention of the detenu under the Act. It is also pointed out that in the said writ petition the Government Advocate produced on 27-2-1985 two letters, one from C.I.D. and the other from the Chief Prosecuting Officer, Srinagar showing that the detenu was not arrested nor was in their custody. In consequence whereof this Court was pleased to issue directions to S. P., Baramulla to produce the detenu in the Court on 6th Mar. 1985. From the perusal of the record, it also transpires that the said order has not been complied with and hence a Contempt Petition is also moved by the petitioner before this Court, which is registered as Contempt Petition No. 3 of 1985 (Criminal), wherein the notice has been issued to the respondent, which is pending disposal. In the present petition, learned counsel for the petitioner attacks the detention and challenged the detention, firstly on the ground that the material on the basis of which the detention order is passed has not been supplied to the detenu depriving him from making an effective representation, the grounds are vague as no specific dates have been mentioned, they are stale and have no annexures with the grounds on which the detenu has been detained. Secondly, the District Magistrate has not shown his awareness in the order about the arrest of the detenu at the time when the order was passed and thirdly that the satisfaction part in the grounds of detention and also the order is missing as a result of which the order of detention on all the three counts is liable to be quashed. Reply affidavit has been filed by District Magistrate, Baramulla, Mr. G. N. Kanth on 1-4-1985 refuting the allegations made by the petitioner regarding the detention of the detenu. He has also given in detail the procedure adopted by him and has in categorical terms that the detention order stands approved by the State Government and in pursuance of Section 13(1) of the Act. The detenu was informed of the grounds, which were explained to him with the enclosures through Superintendent, Central Jail, Srinagar. It is also pointed out in para 2 of the affidavit: "That the detention of the detenu Jangh Bahadur Singh has been ordered on sufficient and valid grounds warranting his detention." The grounds of detention are quoted as under :-

(3.) Their Lordships of the Supreme Court in AIR 1952 SC 350 (Supra) have held : -