J&K High Court Quashes 5 PSAs, Orders Release Of Detainees.

The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh on Thursday quashed Public Safety Act (PSA) against five persons who were detained and directed their immediate release from preventive custody.

Allowing their separate petitions, the court of Justice M.A Chowdhary quashed detention orders against Sadam Hussain Mir of Mir Mohalla Brath Kallan, Sopore, Bashir Ahmad Bhat of Nadihal Bandipora, Parvaiz Ahmad Bhat of Farkain, Kupwara, and Mubarik Ahmed Thoker of Sopat Tangpora, Kulgam.

Sadam Hussain was detained by virtue of an order dated June, 17, 2020 issued by District Magistrate Baramulla while Bhat was booked under PSA detention by order of District Magistrate Bandipora passed on July, 29, 2021.

Install Our App	DOWNLOAD
Join Telegram Channel	JOIN NOW
Join Facebook Group	JOIN NOW
Subscribe YouTube Channel	SUBSCRIBE
Follow On Twitter	FOLLOW
Follow On Instagram	FOLLOW

Khoja was detained in terms of order passed by District Magistrate Kupwara on March, 13, 2021 and Thoker was placed under detention by order of District Magistrate Kulgam issued on October, 18, 2021.

Meanwhile Justice Sanjay quashed the detention order of Sohaib Ahmad Malik of Gundpora, Bandipora who was booked under PSA on July, 29, 2021, issued by District Magistrate, Bandipora.

The court directed the government that the detainees be released forthwith from preventive custody if they were not required in any other case.

The bench while turning down the detention orders noted that detaining authority has not applied its mind to draw the subjective satisfaction to detain the detainees.

“The detainee, as such, has been deprived of his fundamental right to make effective and meaningful representation against the detention order to the detaining authority and the government rendering the same as illegal and unsustainable,” the court said.

It recorded that the law is well settled that if the order of detention comes to an end either by revocation or by the expiry of the period of order of detention, there must be fresh facts for passing a subsequent order of detention. 

“When the detention order has been quashed by the Court, the grounds of said detention order are not to be taken into consideration either as a whole or in part even along with the fresh grounds of detention in order to pass a fresh detention order and, if such previous grounds of detention are taken into consideration while passing a fresh detention order, the order of detention will be vitiated,” the court said while allowing the pleas.