AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
1) In pursuance to order No.40/DMB/PSA/2018 dated 22.06.2018, Shahid Rashid Khan (hereinafter referred to as the detenue), has been taken into
preventive custody and lodged in Central Jail, Kotbalwal, Jammu.
2) The petitioner’s case, as set out in the petition, is that the detenue, without any justification and cause, was booked in FIR No.32/2018 of P/S,
Sheeri. An application for grant of bail was filed on behalf of the detenue which was forwarded by the concerned Court to the SHO, P/S Sheeri for
report but instead of submitting the report, detention order impugned was slapped upon the detenue. The respondents are stated to have ignored to
provide material relied upon by the detaining authority while passing the impugned order of detention and thus deprived the detenue of his guaranteed
Constitutional rights. Grounds of detention are stated to be vague and unfounded. Further, it is contended that there is non-application of mind on
behalf of the detaining authority while passing the impugned order of detention.
3) The respondents despite being given various opportunities did not file the counter affidavit nor produced the detention records so as to negate the
grounds urged in the writ petition.
4) In the detention order it is mentioned that “dossier and other connected documents†were relied upon by the detaining authority. Reference is
also made to a communication received from Senior Superintendent of Police, Baramulla, vide No.CS/PSA/2018/4588-91 dated 20.06.2018. However,
nothing has been brought on record by the respondents to show that the referred material was ever supplied to the detenue. In the grounds of
detention, reference of criminal case having been registered against the detenue has been made. The relevant record has not been produced to
substantiate that the copies of aforementioned FIR, statements recorded under Section 161 Cr. P. C and other material collected in connection
therewith were ever supplied to the detenue. It needs no emphasis that the detenue cannot be expected to make a meaningful exercise of his
constitutional and statutory rights guaranteed under Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India unless and until the material on which the detention is
based, is supplied to the detenue. The failure on the part of detaining authority to supply material renders detention order illegal and unsustainable.
While holding so, I draw support from Dhananjoy Dass v. District Magistrate (AIR 1982 SC 1315). Sophia Ghulam Mohd. Bham v. State of
Maharashtra and others (AIR 1999 SC 3051) and Thahira Haris Etc. Etc. v. Government of Karnataka & Ors. (AIR 2009 SC 2184).
5) Taking conspectus of the aforesaid discussion, petition is allowed, order No. 40/DMB/PSA/2018 dated 22.06.2018, is quashed. The detenue is
directed to be released from the preventive custody forthwith.
6) Disposed of as above.