HC quashes PSA of OGW, directs his release

Excelsior Correspondent

Srinagar, Feb 17: High Court has quashed detention order of an Over Ground Worker (OGW) and directed his release citing that the PSA has been passed on speculation and assumptions by the detaining authority.
Justice Rahul Bharti quashed the PSA of Manzoor Ahmad Bhat of District Pulwama after examining the grounds of detention as well as the detention order of the detenu. “The court is led to a conclusion that the preventive detention has been affected by speculation and assumptions,” reads the judgement.
“In fact, during the course of his preventive detention, he has come to suffer a personal tragedy in the death of his eight months’ old daughter who came to expire on 10.2.2024 while he is in the state of preventive custody and could not have even the solace of being with his wife in the moment of personal loss and grief because of preventive detention slapped on him by fictionalizing his personal liberty prejudicial to the Security of State”.
“The preventive detention of the petitioner is, thus, held to be illegal and, accordingly, the preventive detention passed by District Magistrate, Pulwama and the consequent orders of approval and confirmation by the Government of the UT of Jammu and Kashmir are hereby quashed and the petitioner is directed to be restored to his personal liberty by the Superintendent District Jail, Kathua”, Court directed.
“The District Magistrate, Pulwama in the name of application of mind matched the SSP Pulwama concerned in entertaining the same tone and tenor of assumption as fed by the SSP Pulwama which is exhibited from the fact that the purported grounds of detention order is a copy-paste of the dossier”, Court recorded.
“So much so when in the dossier the SSP Pulwama is meaning to say that the petitioner has been providing his home as a hiding place for terrorists and helping them to plan attacks on civilians/non-locals/police and security forces personnel, the SSP Pulwama is found missing in referring as to which home and in which village/town/city the petitioner is alleged to have been so providing the hiding place”, Justice Bharti question during the proceedings of the case.