The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir & Ladakh (Srinagar Bench), while upholding the detention, ruled that the anti-national videos/photos/posts/chats which were uploaded by the petitioner on his Facebook account is sufficient to the satisfaction of the detaining authority that it is necessary to detain the petitioner to prevent him from indulging in the activities which are prejudicial to the security to the State.
While refusing to quash the detention order, the Court emphasised that the apprehension of the detaining authority with regard to the alleged activities of the petitioner was based upon the reports received from different agencies, which included the videos uploaded by the petitioner on his Facebook account.
The ruling came in reference to the challenge against a detention order issued by District Magistrate, Kupwara, in exercise of powers conferred by Section 8 of the J&K Public Safety Act, 1978, whereby the detenue, was placed under preventive detention to prevent him from indulging in the activities which are prejudicial to the security of the State.
A Single Judge Bench of Justice Sanjay Dhar observed that the detaining authority has relied upon the complaints filed by the police against the petitioner under Section 107/151 of CrPC and videos uploaded by the petitioner on his Facebook, and the petitioner has been provided with the whole material that formed the basis of the grounds of detention.
The Single Judge found that not only have the copies of the complaints and the orders passed thereon by the Executive Magistrate concerned have been furnished to the petitioner but along with the copy of dossier, the detaining authority has provided the screenshots of the Facebook pages of the petitioner in support of their allegation that the petitioner has been uploading the contents with a view to promote terrorism and radicalize the youth.
Further, when only after narrating the background facts, the detaining authority has clearly framed its opinion that the activities of the petitioner are highly prejudicial to the security of the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir, the Bench asserted that the present is not a case where the detaining authority has mechanically copied the contents of the police dossier while formulating the grounds of detention.
Rather, the Bench stated that under the present case, the detaining authority has applied its mind to the police dossier and the material annexed thereto, whereafter it has framed its opinion that it is imperative to detain the petitioner under the provisions of the J&K Public Safety Act.
Appearances:
Advocate Altamash Rashid, for the Petitioner
Advocate Faheem Nisar Shah, for the Respondent
