DAVINDER SINGH Vs. UT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND ANOTHER
LAWS(J&K)-2020-8-6
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
Decided on August 05,2020

DAVINDER SINGH Appellant
VERSUS
Ut Of Jammu And Kashmir And Another Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

ARUN GHOSH V. STATE OF WEST BENGAL [REFERRED TO]
HARADHAN SAHA MADAN LAL AGARWALA VS. STATE OF WEST BENGAL [REFERRED TO]
JAI SINGH VS. STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR [REFERRED TO]
MUNAGALA YADAMMA VS. STATE OF A P [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

Puneet Gupta, J. - (1.)The petition is admitted to hearing. The counter affidavit has been filed in the case and case was taken up for final hearing. The order of detention vide No. 07 of 2019 dated 27.08.2019 in terms of Section 8(1) (a) of the Jammu and Kashmir Public Safety Act, 1978 (hereinafter called as 'the Act'), passed by the respondent No.2 District Magistrate, Jammu, is under challenge in the present writ petition filed by the detainee through his father on the ground that the order has been passed without application of mind and is mere reproduction of the police dossier submitted by SSP, Jammu; that taking recourse to FIRs filed against the petitioner Davinder Singh is without justification; that the order was passed for indefinite period in violation of the statutory period prescribed under law.
(2.)The counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondent No.2 wherein the order impugned is justified by stating there that the same has been passed after applying mind to the dossier submitted by SSP, Jammu with a purpose to prevent the petitioner from indulging in such activities which are highly prejudicial to the maintenance of public order; that the petitioner was supplied with material documents on the basis of which the order was passed; that the detention was required in the interest of safety and security of the citizens; that the petitioner is having criminal mind set and propensity to continue with the criminal activities; that the petitioner has been detained after following due process of law. The prayer is for dismissal of the petition.
(3.)Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. The record has been produced by the learned counsel for the respondents.
;


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