LI Network
Published on: October 8, 2023 at 13:16 IST
The Jammu & Kashmir High Court has recently issued a significant ruling, emphasizing that even a single irrelevant ground is enough to render a preventive detention order invalid. This ruling came in the case of Zubair Ahmad Khan vs. Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir.
In a judgment delivered by Justice Vinod Chatterji Koul, the Court asserted that it is impossible to determine how an irrelevant ground influenced the decision of the detaining authority and contributed to their satisfaction that preventive detention was necessary. Therefore, the inclusion of just one irrelevant ground can vitiate the entire preventive detention order, as the Court highlighted in its decision dated October 5.
The Court found that “the inclusion of an irrelevant or non-existent ground, among other relevant grounds, is an infringement of the first of the rights, and the inclusion of an obscure or vague ground, among other clear and definite grounds, is an infringement of the second of the rights. In either case, there is an invasion of the constitutional rights of the detainee, entitling them to seek relief from the Court.”
Advocate Mukhtar A Makroo, representing the petitioner, argued that the allegations in the grounds of detention lacked specificity and clarity. The petitioner could not effectively respond to these allegations since there were no details provided regarding individuals with whom the petitioner had allegedly associated or supported in any way.
Makroo also pointed out that the detention was based on the opinion of the detaining authority, relying on dossier contents, FIR, and supporting documents. However, there was no mention of a specific FIR in the dossier, nor were complete details provided in the grounds of detention.
The High Court, after considering the arguments of both parties, concluded that the grounds of detention were vague and did not specify any dates or details of the activities attributed to the petitioner. As a result, the Court ruled that the detention was invalid due to the presence of irrelevant and unclear grounds.
The High Court clarified that while it cannot substitute its judgment for the subjective satisfaction of the detaining authority, if even one of the grounds used to justify detention is non-existent, misconceived, or irrelevant, the entire detention order becomes invalid.
Therefore, in this case, the Court quashed the detention of the petitioner, Zubair Ahmad Khan.
