Srinagar, Oct 11: The High Court of J&K and Ladakh has quashed the detention of a man from south Kashmir’s Anantnag at pre-execution stage under the Public Safety Act (PSA), holding that nearly two-decade-old criminal antecedents and the absence of a demonstrated threat to public order could not justify his detention.
A bench of Justice Sanjay Parihar quashed Rouf Ahmad Wani’s preventive detention, while allowing his plea against the order dated October 24, 2024, passed by the District Magistrate, Anantnag.
The court noted that the principal incidents relied upon by the detaining authority pertained to 2005, 2006 and 2007, nearly two decades before the detention order was issued.
It noted that Wani had been acquitted in three criminal cases cited against him.
The court pointed out that Wani was acquitted in FIR No 35/2006 on September 16, 2009, FIR No 89/2007 on May 13, 2017, and FIR No 82/2007 on December 30, 2013.
While the court underscored that acquittal in a criminal case does not automatically make the underlying conduct irrelevant for preventive detention, it held that the authorities were required to demonstrate a continuing and proximate connection between the past incidents and the alleged necessity for detention.
The Court also examined FIR No. 16/2020, registered at Police Station Achabal under Sections 420 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, but found that its mere registration did not establish a threat to public order warranting preventive detention.
Distinguishing between a breach of law and order and a disturbance of public order, the court pointed out that every criminal act does not necessarily affect the even tempo of life of the community or the public at large.
The court further took note of the fact that the detention order, issued on October 24, 2024, had remained unexecuted for a considerable period, with the authorities failing to provide a satisfactory explanation for the delay.
It held that unexplained delay in executing a detention order could weaken the link between the grounds of detention and the alleged necessity to prevent prejudicial activities, particularly when the order was substantially based on stale incidents.
Accordingly, the court allowed the petition and quashed the detention order passed by the District Magistrate, Anantnag against Wani.
About The Author
