High Court quashes PSA detention of 2 persons

Srinagar, Aug 30: The High Court of J&K and Ladakh Friday ordered immediate release of two persons from preventive custody while quashing their detention under Public Safety Act (PSA).

Allowing their habeas corpus pleas, a bench of Justice Sanjay Dhar directed the authorities to release forthwith from custody Zahoor Ahmad Dar from Kulgam and Sehran Muzaffar Dar of Srinagar provided they are not required in other cases.

Zahoor was booked under PSA in terms of a detention order dated 27.08.2022 passed by District Magistrate Kulgam while Sehran was detained by virtue of an order issued by District Magistrate Srinagar on August 30, 2022.

While quashing Sehran’s detention, the court held that “ the legal position is well settled that resort to preventive detention has to be taken only in cases where there is an urgent need to detain a person so as to prevent him from indulging in activities prejudicial to the maintenance of public order or security of the State”.

“When there is unsatisfactory and unexplained delay in executing the order of detention, such delay would throw considerable doubt on the genuineness of the subjective satisfaction recorded by the detaining authority,” court added.

This, the court said, would lead to a legitimate inference that the detaining authority was not really and genuinely satisfied as regards the necessity for detaining the detainee.

The Court noted that the detainee could not be expected to make an effective and purposeful representation which is his constitutional right guaranteed under Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India, unless and until the material, on which the detention is based, is supplied to him.

“The failure on the part of detaining authority to supply the material renders the detention order illegal and unsustainable in law,” it said.

In the case of Zahoor the court observed that the grounds being vague and lacking in material particulars, the detainee could not have made an effective representation against his detention.

“Therefore, there has been violation of constitutional guarantees envisaged under Article 22(5) of the Constitution. The detention order, as such, is illegal and unsustainable,” the court said.