Srinagar, Sep 11: The High Court of Jammu Kashmir and Ladakh has quashed the preventive detention order issued against a Kishtwar locals who had been booked under the Public Safety Act (PSA) last year.
Justice MA Chowdhary, while allowing a habeas corpus petition, directed that the detenue, Muhammad Jaffer Sheikh, son of Ghulam Muhammad Sheikh of Nattas, a resident of Dool, Kishtwar, be released forthwith if not required in any other case. Sheikh had been placed under detention through Order No. 6th/DM/K/PSA of 2024 dated November 7, 2024, passed by the District Magistrate, Kishtwar.
During the hearing, Advocates SS Ahmed and Rahul Raina, appearing for the petitioner, argued that Sheikh was not informed of the period within which he could file a representation against the detention order. They contended that old FIRs from 1997, 2015, and 2019 had been cited as grounds for detention, which had no proximate link to the present necessity, and that neither the grounds of detention nor relevant material was properly supplied or explained to the detenue.
The Government, represented by Advocate Eishaan Dadhichi, relied on three FIRs and four Daily Diary Reports (DDRs) recorded at Police Station Kishtwar and PP Dool to justify the detention.
Justice Chowdhary, however, noted that the DDR entries had not culminated in any criminal proceedings and merely recording allegations could not justify preventive detention. He further observed that although the Additional District Magistrate, Kishtwar, had forwarded Sheikh’s representation to the Home Department on November 26, 2024, the record was silent on whether the representation was considered or its outcome communicated to the petitioner.
Quashing the order, the Court underscored that personal liberty is among the most cherished freedoms guaranteed under the Constitution, and safeguards under Article 22 were enacted to limit the State’s power to detain individuals without trial.
“The impugned detention order stands vitiated. The detenue shall be released from preventive custody forthwith, if not required in any other case,” the Court directed. [KNT]