Manzoor Ahmad vs State of J. and K. and Others

Bashir A. Kirmani, J.—Impugned in this writ petition with a prayer for its quashment is the detention order No. PSA-2007/01 purporting to

have been passed by District Magistrate, Reasi on 3-11-2007, whereunder one Manzoor Ahmad S/o Abdul Aziz Gujjar R/o Dhakikote is

currently undergoing detention.

Ground pleaded in support of prayer is that the detention order passed against petitioner is based on non-existing circumstances and is legally

untenable as having been passed in violence of procedure particularly because even though illiterate and unable to understand English, grounds of

detention have been furnished to the detenu in that language which he could not understand. During course of submissions, petitioner's counsel

while further elucidating contents of the petition has also informed that the criminal case on basis whereof the detenu was originally arrested has

already been dismissed, which belies the basis of his detention regarding which no satisfaction too has been recorded by detaining authority who

did not even supply the requisite documents to petitioner.

Respondents have neither filed reply nor furnished records of detention pertaining to the matter with the result that their version regarding pleas

taken in the memo of petition is not known. During his oral submissions, however, learned AAG has contended that since activities of the detenu

were highly prejudicial to security of State, he was rightly detained in observance of all requisite procedure in view whereof he had no reason to

challenge the detention. Learned AAG has, however, admitted detenu's acquittal from substantive criminal case.

I have heard learned Counsel and considered the matter. Perusal of the grounds of detention allegedly furnished to detenu reveals that he is

alleged of having been associated with a militant organization and as such played a pivotal role in carrying out the dastardly act of violence which

resulted in death of around 26 persons at Prankot of District Reasi, by guiding the involved militants to spot for which his activities were held to be

anti national and threatening to national security. The said memo of grounds also reveals that in above said occurrence resulting in death of 26

persons, concerned police registered a case being FIR No. 37/1998 of Police Station, Reasi Under Sections 302, 307/436/120-B RPC r/w

Section 4/25 Arms Act wherein the detenu along with co-accused was convicted by Sessions Court, Udhampur on 29-7-2007 only to be left

away by the appeal court. The judgment from Division Bench of this Court which heard petitioner's conviction appeal No. 10-A/2003 together

with concerned Court's reference No. 8 of the same year reveals that detenu's conviction as recorded by trial Court was reversed by appeal

Bench on 31-7-2007 resulting in clear acquittal on the grounds that there was no evidence to connect him with alleged occurrence and sustain the

conviction recorded by trial Court.

In that circumstantial backdrop arise for consideration the two grounds pleaded by detenu for having his detention quashed. First the factual limb

questioning substance of his involvement in alleged occurrence which after the acquittal order recorded by this Court absolving the detenu of his

involvement in the above said massacre which he was charged with, in view whereof allegation of his involvement in the crime is not easily

believable. What other factual circumstances did or do exist to justify detenu's continuous detention have not been spelled out.

In addition, the detenu, who was convicted way back in 2003 has admittedly been in custody till date since his arrest reportedly in 1999 has

completed around a decade of confinement till now. It is not gatherable from anywhere as to what such activities were attributable to him during

these ten years as would be a threat to security of the State. Languishing in jail as he was for as long as ten years, the detenu cannot easily be

assumed to have committed any such act or acts as could influence the word outside his jail unless shown to have had. As a matter of fact with

acquittal from the only alleged involvement, it appears to be quite difficult for detaining authority to justify his detention on the grounds

communicated to him for their staleness, lack of proximity in point of time and dependability particularly because neither in detention order nor

elsewhere does he appear to have disclosed as to on what reasons/circumstances/grounds, he assumed subjective satisfaction regarding necessity

of having the detenu detained in custody even after his acquittal by the appeal Bench.

Now comes petitioner's plea that grounds of detention which are admittedly quoted in English language reportedly not understood by the detenu

were not translating/explaining to him is as already said unrebutted on record. Law is well settled that when detenu does not understand the

language in which grounds of detention are served upon, him the same are required to be translated/explained to him in the language that he

understands without which they would not be deemed to have been properly communicated resulting in deprivation of his right to make an effective

representation against his detention. Reference in this behalf may be made to Apex Court judgment in Smt. Raziya Umar Bakshi Vs. Union of India

and Others, . the relevant portion wherefrom is reproduced below:

In case where order of detention is coached in a language that detenu does not understand the same is required to be translated to him in a

language understood by him without which it would deemed not to have been effectively communicated and non-communication of grounds

deprives the detenu of his important constitutional right of representing against order of detention. In case the detaining authority claims the grounds

to have been so communicated to the detenu then the officer who did so is required to put in an affidavit in support of the assertion that as a matter

of fact he did so, or else the, detaining authority is required to record his satisfaction regarding the grounds haying been so communicated to the

detenu. Instantly the assertion of detenu is that even grounds in English language were coached and there is an assertion also on the part of

detaining authority that they were translated to the detenu, but the same appears to be quite bald for want of any supporting material like affidavit

of concerned officer as would be required in terms of said judgment mentioned above which would be sufficient to vitiate the. detention under

challenge. In view whereof other grounds pleaded/projected do not require to be discussed.

Since nothing to observe the mandate of aforesaid judgment appears to have been done in the instant case, the detention suffers on that count also.

For all that has been stated above, petition is allowed and the impugned detention order No. PSA-2007/01 dated 3-11-2007 passed by

District Magistrate, Reasi, whereunder detenu namely, Manzoor Ahmad S/o Abdul Aziz R/o Dhaki Kote District Reasi, is currently under

detention is quashed with a direction for his immediate release.

Disposed of.