 Early Times Report
Jammu, Dec 9: The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has dismissed a habeas corpus petition filed by Waseem Ahmad Dar @ Leepa, thereby upholding his preventive detention under the J&K Public Safety Act, 1978.
The petition challenged Detention Order No. 02-DMK/PSA of 2024 dated 10.02.2024, issued by the District Magistrate, Kupwara, to prevent the detenue from indulging in activities allegedly prejudicial to the security of the State.
Justice Sanjay Dhar noted that the petitioner had questioned the detention on grounds of alleged violation of constitutional and procedural safeguards, arguing that the grounds were vague and stale, that the complete material was not supplied, and that his representation was not properly considered and communicated.
The respondents, however, maintained that the detenue’s activities were prejudicial to the security of the State and stated that the detention order, grounds and the material relied upon were furnished and explained to him, with due intimation of his right to make representation before the Government and the detaining authority.
After examining the detention record, the Court recorded that the petitioner was supplied a set of documents including the warrant, grounds of detention, notice, dossier, other relevant material and Urdu translations, with execution receipts bearing his signatures.
The Court further observed that the detaining authority had relied, inter-alia, on complaints under Section 107/151 CrPC and content uploaded on social media. It noted that screenshots of the Facebook pages were also provided in support of the allegation that the petitioner was uploading content aimed at promoting terrorism and radicalising youth, thereby negating the plea of non-supply of material.
Turning down the contention of non-application of mind, the Court held that the detaining authority had not mechanically replicated the police dossier but had applied its mind to the material and arrived at an independent satisfaction that detention was necessary.
The Bench also rejected the argument that ordinary criminal law should have been invoked instead of preventive detention, noting that no FIR had been lodged and that the apprehension was based on reports from different agencies including social media content. The Court specifically referred to alleged anti-national videos/photos/posts/chats uploaded on the petitioner’s Facebook account as forming the basis of the detaining authority’s satisfaction.
Finding no ground to interfere with the detention order, the Court dismissed the petition. (JNF) |
