SRINAGAR: The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh has dismissed a petition challenging the preventive detention of a Srinagar man under the Public Safety Act (PSA), holding that there was no ground to interfere with the detention order.
Justice Sanjay Dhar passed the judgment on August 29 while hearing a petition filed by Bilal Ahmad Lone, who had challenged a detention order issued by the District Magistrate, Srinagar, on October 11, 2024.
Lone’s counsel argued that the allegations forming the basis of the detention were vague and had no nexus with him. It was also submitted that the last alleged activity attributed to him dated back to 2017 and that the prolonged gap between the alleged activity and the detention order had snapped the required proximity between the two. The petitioner further alleged that relevant material had not been supplied to him and that his representation against the detention had not been considered in time.
The authorities opposed the plea, maintaining that the detention order was passed after due application of mind and was based on an assessment of the petitioner’s past conduct and surrounding circumstances. They alleged that Lone had been involved in the 2017 lynching of a Deputy Superintendent of Police-rank officer deployed at Jamia Masjid during Shab-i-Qadr. The authorities also stated that all relevant material had been supplied to him and that the statutory and constitutional safeguards had been complied with.
The court noted that Lone had figured in three FIRs, including cases registered at Nowhatta and Safakadal police stations in 2016 and 2017. It also noted that he had earlier been detained under the PSA in September 2022 and was released from custody on September 10, 2024, after completion of the detention period. The court rejected the argument that he had never been released from custody, noting that he remained out of custody between September 10 and October 11, 2024, when the fresh detention order was passed.
On the allegation that the material relied upon for the detention had not been supplied, the court found that the detention record showed that Lone had received the detention order, notice of detention, grounds of detention, dossier and 48 pages of other material, totalling 58 pages. He had also signed a receipt acknowledging their receipt.
The court also rejected the contention that his representation had not been considered. According to the record, Lone submitted a representation to the government on October 21, 2024, which was rejected through a communication dated November 4, 2024.
On the question of vagueness in the grounds of detention, the court noted that the order contained specific allegations concerning activities after his release from custody. It said credible inputs from sensitive sources indicated that a Pakistan-based TRF handler, identified as Ahmad Khalid, had contacted Lone through an encrypted messaging application and allegedly asked him to recruit a fresh module of young men for terrorist activities.
“Thus, there are specific allegations in the grounds of detention,” the court observed, finding no merit in the petitioner’s challenge.
The court consequently dismissed the petition, holding that there was no ground to interfere with the detention order.
