Srinagar, July 24, KDC: The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh has, in a series of judgments delivered over two days, upheld four preventive detention orders passed under the Jammu and Kashmir Public Safety Act, declining to interfere after finding that the detaining authorities had complied with the constitutional and statutory safeguards governing preventive detention in each case.
The four judgments, delivered on July 23 and 24, stemmed from challenges to preventive detention orders passed against detenues from Srinagar, Pulwama, Kupwara and Jammu. The petitioners alleged procedural irregularities, non application of mind, reliance on stale material and violation of constitutional safeguards, but the High Court found no legal infirmity warranting interference and upheld each detention order.
Justice Shahzad Azeem dismissed the petition filed by Musavir Nabi Bhat, who challenged his third preventive detention order issued by the District Magistrate, Srinagar. While the petitioner argued that the earlier detention orders had already been quashed and that the fresh order rested on the same allegations, the administration maintained that new intelligence gathered after his release indicated that he had resumed activities prejudicial to the security of the Union Territory through contacts with militant handlers using encrypted communication, justifying a fresh detention.
Justice Sanjay Dhar similarly declined to interfere with the detention of Showkat Ahmad Chopan, detained under an order issued by the District Magistrate, Pulwama, to prevent activities prejudicial to the security of the State. The challenge was founded on allegations that the grounds of detention were vague, relevant material had not been supplied and there was a considerable time gap between the alleged activities and the detention order. The Court rejected the challenge after examining the detention record produced by the authorities.
In another judgment, Justice Moksha Khajuria Kazmi upheld the detention of Naseer Ahmad Naikoo, ordered by the District Magistrate, Kupwara. Naikoo contended that the detention relied principally on an FIR from which he had already been discharged and that the allegations lacked any nexus with him. The administration defended the order, asserting that it was based on verified material indicating activities detrimental to the security of the State and that all procedural safeguards under the Public Safety Act had been observed.
Justice Rajnesh Oswal also dismissed the petition filed by Arjun Kumar, whose detention had been ordered by the District Magistrate, Jammu, to prevent acts prejudicial to public order. The petitioner questioned the detention on grounds that the dossier and detention order bore the same date and alleged that the material relied upon had not been supplied. The authorities, however, described him as a habitual offender involved in multiple serious criminal cases and maintained that the detention followed full compliance with constitutional and statutory requirements. (KDC)
