GHNABIGOJRI Vs. STATE OF J&K AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Habeas Corpus Petition, challenges orderNo. 139/DMB/PSA/2017 dated 08.11.2017 passed by the District Magistrate, Baramulla, herein respondent No. 2, whereby the petitioner has been detained in preventive detention under section 8(a) of the Jammu and Kashmir Public Safety Act, 1978 (for short the Act).

(2.) The impugned order has been challenged on various grounds. It is contended that ever since his arrest by the security forces in the year 2011, petitioner has been repeatedly detained in preventive detention. The earlier two orders of detention passed against him have been quashed by this Court. It is contended in this regard that petitioner was initially detained vide order No. 160/DMB/PSA/2016 dated 01.11.2016 passed by respondent No. This order was quashed by this Court vide judgment dated 03.04.2017 passed in HCP No. 585/2016. He, however, was not released and was again taken in preventive detention by virtue of order No. 06/DMB/PSA/2017 dated 10.04.2017. The said order too was quashed by this Court vide judgment dated 01.09.2017 in HCP No. 130/2017. He was discharged from the preventive detention and shifted to Police Station, Tarzo and was detained again in preventive detention vide order No. 117/DMB/PSA/2017 dated 10.10.2017. The said order, however,was not approved by the Governmentand refusal was conveyed to the detaining authority vide communication dated 16.10.2017. The petitionerwas not released this time also andthe respondent No. 2 issued the impugned order of detention, whereby petitioner was again taken into prevention detention.

(3.) The facts relating to the earlier orders of detention dated 01.11.2016 and 10.04.2017 and both these orders having been quashed by this Court have not been denied by the respondents. It is not denied also that the third order of detention passed by the detaining authority on 10.10.2017was not approved by the Government and information in this regard was conveyed to the detaining authority vide communication dated 16.10.2017. A copy of this intimation has been produced as annexure P6 to the petition. By virtue of this communication, the Government, Home Department, besides not approving the order of detention dated 10.10.2017, had also impressed upon the detaining authority that "it should be ensured that subject is not kept in wrongful confinement".