HC dismisses petition challenging PSA

16/02/2018

Srinagar, Feb 15: In the rarest of rare case where the petition seeking quashment of PSA dismissed, here the peittion filed Mushtaq Ahmad Regoo challenging the District Magistrate, Pulwama, on the basis of dossier placed before him by Superin tendent of Police, Awantipora, vide letter no.Pros/ PSA/2016-1861-64 dated 5th September 2016, recorded his subjective satisfaction that there are sufficient grounds to detain Mushtaq Ahmad Regoo son of Ghulam Mohammad Regoo resident of Khrew Tehsil Pampore District Pulwama, (for brevity "petitioner"), aiming at to prevent him from acting in any manner that is prejudicial to the maintenance of public order and therefore, vide his Order no.61/DMP/PSA/16 dated 7th September 2016, ordered petitioner's detention and lodgement in District Jail, Kathua.
Justice Sanjeev Kumar after hearing both the sides observed that in the present case, the repetition of highly prejudicial activities on the part of the petitioner is stated to have resulted in lodgement of number FIRs, bearing FIR nos. 64/2016, 65/2016 and 67/2016, under Sections 147, 148, 188, 353, 341, 307, 109, 427, registered in Police Station Pampore and thereafter FIR nos.149/2016 and 155/2016 as well. Thus, the detaining authority, after recording satisfaction that the activities of the petitioner were likely to prejudice the maintenance of 'public order', has passed the detention order in question. In the said backdrop, there is no substance in the argument that the incidents alleged, do not have the live link with the detention order impugned in the petition.
Court further observed that the respondents, after the detention order was passed, made efforts to execute it. However, the petitioner did not allow the detention order to be executed and evaded its execution and thereafter approached this Court with petition on hand. A Bench of this Court by order dated 2nd December 2016 stayed the impugned detention order and directed respondents not to execute it till further orders from this Court. So, the detention order has remained unexecuted. The detention order, therefore, cannot be said as stale or belated and non-execution of the detention order cannot be attributed to the respondents. The facts of the present case are, therefore, distinguishable from the facts of the cases/ citations relied upon by learned counsel for the and the present case does not fall under any of the five exceptions as culled out in Alka Subash Gadia's case, for this Court to interfere.
Justice Sanjeev Kumar further observed that this is not a fit case where any interference is called for, before execution of the order of detention. The petitioner, if so advised, may first surrender pursuant to the order of detention and thereafter have his grievances examined on merits. With these observations High Court dismissed petition
challenging PSA. JNF

Photo Gallery

BSE Sensex

NSE Nifty