FIRDOUS AHMAD WANI Vs. STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
LAWS(J&K)-2020-3-52
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
Decided on March 19,2020

Firdous Ahmad Wani Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR Respondents




JUDGEMENT

Ali Mohammad Magrey,J. - (1.)Impugned in this Heabus Corpus petition with a prayer for quashment thereof is the detention order no. 141/DMB/PSA/2019 dated 30.03.2019, purporting to have been passed by District Magistrate Baramulla, whereunder detenu namely Firdous Ahmad Wani s/o Late Ghulam Mohammad Wani R/o Mohalla Bazar Seri Warpora, Pattan District Baramulla, is under detention.
(2.)Grounds pleaded in support of prayer are that after having been quashed the earlier detention order no. 66/DMB/PSA/2018 dated 20th August 2018, the detenu was again detained in terms of the detention order impugned in this petition on the so called 'dossier' placed before respondent no.2, on the same and similar grounds. It is submitted that his further detention was necessary to prevent him from indulging in activities prejudicial to the maintenance of the security of the State and national law, accordingly while in police custody he was ordered to be detained in preventive custody vide impugned detention order passed by District Magistrate, Baramulla. The earlier detention order was challenged in H.C. Petition No. 239/2018 which was allowed vide judgment dated 11th Dec. 2018, but instead of releasing him from custody, the detaining authority again passed the detention order impugned in the instant petition. During arguments the learned counsel has further elucidated the contents of petition with reference to annexures placed on record, and contended that neither the detention in question was legal nor were grounds thereof duly communicated to the detenu even though quite vague and unfounded.
(3.)In his counter affidavit, respondent no.2 has stated that the detenu's activities being prejudicial to security of the State, his further detention was necessary to prevent him from indulging in such acts, which was also approved by the Government and the State Advisory Board constituted u/s 14 of P.S. Act. During course of his submissions the respondents counsel besides reiterating the contents of counter affidavit has contended that in circumstances of the case the impugned detention is well founded in fact and law.
;


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