VIKAS YOUSUF BEIGH Vs. STATE OF J&K
LAWS(J&K)-2020-9-43
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
Decided on September 10,2020

Vikas Yousuf Beigh Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF JANDK Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

BINOD SINGH VS. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE,DHANBAD BIHAR [REFERRED TO]
ICCHU DEVI CHORARIA VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
ABDUL LATIF ABDUL WAHAB SHEIKH VS. B K JHA [REFERRED TO]
SOPHIA GULAM MOHAMMAD BHAM VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. AMRIT LAL MANCHANDA [REFERRED TO]
REKHA VS. STATE OF TAMIL NADU [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

Sindhu Sharma,J. - (1.)District Magistrate, Shopian vide order No. 57/DMS/PSA/2019 dated 27.08.2019 detained Vikas Yousuf Beigh @ Vicky S/o Mohd. Yousuf Beigh with a view to prevent him from acting in any manner which was prejudicial to the security of the State/Country. This detention order has been challenged by the detenu through his brother.
(2.)The detention of the detenu has been assailed amongst others on the grounds that; (i) the detenu was already in custody at the time of passing of impugned detention order in case arising out of FIR No. 123/2019 in which he had neither applied for bail nor bail could have been granted as this case involved the commission of offence under Chapter-IV of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act; (ii) the Detaining Authority had not shown any compelling reason for passing the order of detention against the detenu, who was already in custody; (iii) the Detaining Authority had not furnished the relevant material like copy of dossier, FIRs and other relevant material which were relied upon by the Detaining Authority, while passing the order of detention and this had prevented him from making an effective representation against the order of detention; (iv) Detaining Authority had not prepared the grounds of detention itself which was prerequisite for passing the order of detention but has relied upon the police dossier. There is, thus, total non-application of mind, while passing the order of detention; (v) the detenu was neither informed of his right to make an effective representation against the detention order nor to whom the same was to made, therefore, the detention order is illegal and, as such, is vitiated.
(3.)Mr. M. A. Chashoo, learned AAG appearing on behalf of the respondents, has filed counter affidavit as well as produced the detention record. According to learned AAG, the detenu was detained under the provisions of the Act vide detention order dated 27.08.2019. All statutory and constitutional guarantees were fulfilled and complied with by the Detaining Authority, while passing the order of detention. It is submitted that the preventive detention is not punitive but only preventive and the Detaining Authority had derived its subject satisfaction after considering all the grounds of detention, order of detention and all the material on record. In compliance to the District Magistrate's order, warrant of detention was executed by the Executing Officer-Javid Ahmad/SI of DPL Shopian and the detenu was handed over to Superintendent Central Jail, Srinagar.
;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.