MOHD YOUNIS DAR Vs. STATE OF J&K
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
Mohd Younis Dar
STATE OF JANDK
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) MOHD Younis Dar was detained by District Magistrate, Srinagar, vide
his order No. DMS/PSA/53/2005 dated 19.11.2005 on the basis of following
grounds of detention: -
"Whereas, perusal of record provided by Superintendent of Police, Ganderbal, reveals that you are a local trained militant of H.M. outfit operating in the valley. The aim and object of this outfit is to liberate the State of Jammu and Kashmir from the Union of India and its annexation with Pakistan by waging war against the lawfully established Government. Whereas, you were working as Tangawala and was motivated by two militants @ Umer and @ Adnan of HM outfit. You being a poor fellow fell into their trap and started working as an OGW/runner for them. You were initially used as a guide in the general area of Anantnag, but with the passage of time you became a loyal member of these two ANEs and worked as per their desire. You were also used in carrying their weapons from one place to another. On 18th of July 2005 while on way towards Nunner Ganderbal you were apprehended by 05 RR at Malshahibagh and following recovery was made from your possession. 1. UBGL 01 2. UBGL Grenade 04 3. IED Explosive 03 Kg In this connection a case under FIR No. 65/2005 u/s 7/25 I.A. Act stands registered by P/S Ganderbal against you. It is clear that your activities are highly prejudicial to the maintenance of the security of the State. Under such compelling circumstances, it has become imperative to detain you under Public Safety Act, 1978 for which orders are being issued separately."
(2.) HE has questioned his detention by this petition filed through Gh. Mohammad Dar, his father, inter alia, on the following grounds: -
(i) The detenue, after his arrest in F.I.R. No. 65 of 2005 under Section 7/25 Arms Act, was released on bail by learned Sessions Judge, Srinagar, which fact was not considered by the detaining authority before directing the action of the petitioner in preventive custody. (ii) The detenue was not provided with the material, which had been relied upon by the detaining authority at the time of issuance of detention order, thereby depriving the detenue of his constitutional right under Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India to make an effective representation against his detention.
(3.) THE detaining authority, in its reply affidavit, has not said anything as regards the plea of the detenue regarding his release on bail
by learned Sessions Judge, Srinagar. Regarding the plea of non -supply of
material relied upon by the detaining authority, all that it says in
reply is that the detenue must show that non -supply of material had
impaired the right of the detenue to make an effective and purposeful
representation. Detention order has been supported by the detaining
authority by saying that the detenue is local trained militant of
Hizab -ul -Mujahedin banned outfit and was working as Tangawala. He was
motivated by two militants namely Umer and Adnan of the outfit and he
being a poor fellow fell into the trap and started working as an over
ground worker/runner for them. The detenue had been alleged to have been
working as a guide, who later turned to be a loyal member of the anti
national - elements.
Detention records have been produced by Sh. M. A. Wani, learned Dy. AG.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.