Skip to content


Bagh HussaIn Vs. the State of Jammu and Kashmir - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCriminal
CourtSupreme Court of India
Decided On
Case NumberWrit Petition No. 399 of 1969
Judge
Reported in(1971)3SCC894
ActsJammu and Kashmir Preventive Detention Act, 1964 - Sections 3(2), 5, 8, 13-A
AppellantBagh Hussain
RespondentThe State of Jammu and Kashmir
DispositionPetition Dismissed
Excerpt:
.....disclose the grounds for detention in public interest -- in the affidavit it is submitted that the district magistrate, rajouri ordered under section 3(2) read with section 5 of the jammu and kashmir preventive detention act, 1964, with a view to preventing the petitioner, bagh hussain, from acting in a manner prejudicial to the security of the state, that the petitioner be detained, and that the petitioner was informed by an order, dated july 23, 1969, under section 8 read with section 13-a of the jammu and kashmir preventive detention act, 1964, that it was against the public interest to disclose to him the grounds on which the order of detention was made.  under section 8 of the jammu and kashmir preventive detention act, 1964, the grounds of detention have to be disclosed to the..........government of jammu and kashmir, has filed an affidavit. in the affidavit it is submitted that the district magistrate, rajouri ordered under section 3(2) read with section 5 of the jammu and kashmir preventive detention act, 1964, with a view to preventing the petitioner, bagh hussain, from acting in a manner prejudicial to the security of the state, that the petitioner be detained, and that the petitioner was informed by an order, dated july 23, 1969, under section 8 read with section 13-a of the jammu and kashmir preventive detention act, 1964, that it was against the public interest to disclose to him the grounds on which the order of detention was made. shri bakaya further affirmed that the detention order issued by the district magistrate was approved by the government of jammu and.....
Judgment:

J.C. SHAH, J.

1. By our order, dated December 19, 1969, we have dismissed this petition. We are recording the reasons for the order dismissing the petition.

2. By an undated letter addressed by the petitioner, Bagh Hussain, to this Court, the petitioner claimed that he was illegally detained in the Central Jail, Jammu for more than six months and that an order for his release may be made. The letter was treated as a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, and rule nisi was issued to the State of Jammu and Kashmir to show cause why the petitioner should not be released.

3. Shri P.N. Bakaya, Addl. Secretary to Government of Jammu and Kashmir, has filed an affidavit. In the affidavit it is submitted that the District Magistrate, Rajouri ordered under Section 3(2) read with Section 5 of the Jammu and Kashmir Preventive Detention Act, 1964, with a view to preventing the petitioner, Bagh Hussain, from acting in a manner prejudicial to the security of the State, that the petitioner be detained, and that the petitioner was informed by an order, dated July 23, 1969, under Section 8 read with Section 13-A of the Jammu and Kashmir Preventive Detention Act, 1964, that it was against the public interest to disclose to him the grounds on which the order of detention was made. Shri Bakaya further affirmed that the detention order issued by the District Magistrate was approved by the Government of Jammu and Kashmir after the case was placed before the Chief Minister “incharge, Home Department” and an order, dated August 11, 1969, approving of the detention was made.

4. Copies of the order of the District Magistrate, Rajouri, ordering the detention of the petitioner and declaring that it was against the public interest to disclose the grounds of detention to the petitioner and informing him accordingly under Section 8 read with Section 13-A of the said Act, are filed. A copy of the order approving the order of detention of the Government has also been filed.

5. Under Section 8 of the Jammu and Kashmir Preventive Detention Act, 1964, the grounds of detention have to be disclosed to the person affected by the order of detention. But under Section 13-A of the said Act, it is provided by sub-section (2) that if a person is detained for acting in a manner prejudicial to the security of the State, nothing in Section 8 of the Act would apply, if the authority making the order by the same or a subsequent order directs to the person detained, informing him that it would be against the public interest to disclose to him the grounds on which his detention order was made.

6. In the present case, the District Magistrate has made an order under Section 13-A(2) read with Section 8. There is no ground to think that the order of detention has been made for a collateral purpose. The petition fails and is dismissed.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //