Srinagar, Feb 03, (KDC): The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has held that preventive detention under the Jammu and Kashmir Public Safety Act (PSA), 1978 cannot be sustained on past, stale or ceased conduct and is justified only when there exists a live and proximate link between the alleged activities and the object sought to be achieved.
A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Arun Palli and Justice Rajnesh Oswal, according to news agency Kashmir Dot Com, made these observations while allowing an appeal filed by Huzaif Ahmad Dar and quashing his preventive detention ordered by the District Magistrate, Anantnag, under Section 8 of the PSA.
The appellant had challenged the dismissal of his habeas corpus petition by the Writ Court, contending that the detention order dated April 20, 2024 was passed mechanically and without application of mind. He argued that the alleged activities attributed to him were stale and that the last FIR relied upon by the authorities was FIR No. 219/2022, in which he had already been released due to lack of incriminating evidence.
After examining the detention record, the High Court found that the entire dossier and grounds of detention revolved around the 2022 FIR, without citing any specific illegal activity post-release. The Court noted that allegations claiming the appellant remained in contact with “overground workers” were entirely bald and vague, as they did not disclose identities, dates, particulars or any supporting material.
The Bench observed that such vague assertions, unsupported by any material, clearly reflected non-application of mind by the detaining authority, rendering the detention order legally unsustainable.
Significantly, the Court recorded that the respondents’ own records conceded that the appellant had remained “silent” after September 13, 2023. The Bench held that once the detaining authority admits a total cessation of activity, the very jurisdictional basis for invoking preventive detention disappears. In the absence of any current or proximate threat to security, continued detention becomes arbitrary and legally unsustainable, the Court ruled.
Reiterating settled constitutional principles, the division bench held that preventive detention cannot be sustained on vague, stale or indefinite allegations, as the detaining authority is constitutionally obligated to furnish clear, precise and proximate grounds. This requirement, the Court said, is essential to enable the detenu to exercise the right to make an effective representation under Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India.
The Bench further noted that these crucial aspects were not adequately examined by the learned Writ Court, and therefore the judgment dismissing the habeas corpus petition could not be sustained in law.
Accordingly, the Division Bench set aside the earlier judgment, quashed the detention order bearing No. 09/DMA/PSA/DET/2024, and directed that the appellant be released forthwith, if not required in connection with any other case. (KDC)
