Jammu and Kashmir High Court: Puneet Gupta, J. dismissed the writ petition and set aside the detention order on the grounds that it did not stand the test of law.
According to the factual background of the present case, the petitioner has challenged the order passed by the respondent whereby the petitioner was detained under Section 8 of the J&K Public Safety Act, 1978, on the score that the petitioner has not explained the grounds of detention while passing the order thereby he was not in a position to make proper representations to the Government.
Further, Ankur Sharma, counsel on behalf of the petitioner contended that the impugned order lacks application of judicial mind and is a duplication of the dossier of the police.
The Court on taking note of the representations made by the petitioner and delving deeper into the facts and circumstances of the case reiterated certain Supreme Court verdicts which were noteworthy and applicable to not just the case at hand but also future cases.
Rajesh Vashdev Advani v. State of Maharashtra, (2005) 8 SCC 390 — Non-application of mind by the Court and duplication of police dossier attracts setting aside the said order passed by it.
Jai Singh v. State of J&K, (1985) 1 SCC 561 — A detention order encapsulating the same wordings as the dossier is liable to be quashed.
Union of India v. Dimple Happy Dhakad, 2019 SCC OnLine SC 875 — Subjective satisfaction of the detaining authority is not immune from judicial reviewability.
Nevertheless, the Court did not hesitate to point out the very underpinning purpose of a preventive detention order which is to prevent the person from committing the acts prejudicial to the maintenance of public order. The detention order cannot be passed in a casual manner by the concerned authority thereby depriving the person of his liberty. [Surinder Singh v. Union Territory of J&K, 2020 SCC OnLine J&K 394, decided on 11-08-2020]
