Jammu & Kashmir High Court
Zakir Hussain vs Union Territory Of Jammu & Kashmir on 4 August, 2025
Author: Rahul Bharti
Bench: Rahul Bharti
2025:JKLHC-JMU:2139
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT JAMMU
(through virtual mode)
Reserved on : 05.06.2025
Pronounced on : 04.08.2025
HCP No. 23/2025
Zakir Hussain, Age 29 years,
S/o Abdul Karim,
R/o Khanpur,
Tehsl Nagrota, District Jammu.
.....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Masood Chowdhary, Advocate
Vs
1. Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir,
Through Commissioner/Secretary,
Home Department, Civil Secretariat, Jammu / Srinagar.
2. District Magistrate, Jammu.
3. Senior Superintendent of Police, Jammu.
4. Superintendent District Jail, Udhampur.
..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Pawan Dev Singh, Dy. AG
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAHUL BHARTI, JUDGE
JUDGMENT
01. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as
Mr. Pawan Dev Singh, learned Dy. AG for the respondents.
02. Perused the pleadings and the documents therewith.
Also gone through the detention record as produced from the
end of Mr. Pawan Dev Singh, learned Dy. AG.
2025:JKLHC-JMU:2139
2 HCP No. 23/2025
03. The petitioner is a detenu suffering preventive
detention custody in terms of the Jammu & Kashmir Public
Safety Act, 1978 and has, thus, petitioned this Court through
the medium of the present writ petition filed on 24.01.2025
seeking a writ of habeas corpus to regain and retrieve his
personal liberty.
04. The respondent No. 3 – Sr. Superintendent of Police
(SSP), Jammu came forward with submission of a dossier to the
respondent No. 2-District Magistrate, Jammu vide
communication No.CRB/Dossier/2024/60/DPOJ dated
26.12.2024 thereby putting forth the adverse antecedents of
the petitioner on the basis whereof the petitioner’s preventive
detention was solicited in order to prevent him from acting and
indulging in activities prejudicial to the maintenance of public
order.
05. In said dossier by the respondent No. 3 – Sr.
Superintendent of Police (SSP), Jammu, the petitioner came to
be referred as a habitual criminal and desperate character
repeatedly engaging himself in acts of cattle lifting, smuggling
of bovine having no respect for law of the land, believing in
breaking of law and already implicated in number of FIRs in
different Police Stations of Jammu & Samba districts.
2025:JKLHC-JMU:2139
3 HCP No. 23/2025
06. Following criminal cases came to be cited in the
dossiers to support the recommendation for preventive
detention of the petitioner :-
1. FIR No.200/2017 dated 25.09.2017 registered by
the Police Station Nagrota for alleged commission
of offence/s under section/s 188 Ranbir Penal
Code read with 3/5 Prevention of Cruelty to
Animals Act, 1960.
2. FIR No.263/2017 dated 06.12.2017 again
registered by the Police Station Nagrota for
alleged commission of offence/s under section/s
188 Ranbir Penal Code read with 3/5 Prevention
of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960.
3. FIR No. 18/2023 dated 14.02.2023 registered by
the Police Station Jhajjar Kotli for alleged
commission of offence/s under section/s 188
Indian Penal Code read with 11 Prevention of
Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960.
4. FIR No. 141/2023 dated 05.04.2023 registered
by the Police Station Kathua for alleged
commission of offence/s under section/s 188
Indian Penal Code read with 11 Prevention of
Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960.
5. FIR No. 163/2023 dated 17.06.2023 registered
by the Police Station Rajbagh for alleged
commission of offence/s under section/s
279/336/188 Indian Penal Code read with 11
2025:JKLHC-JMU:21394 HCP No. 23/2025
Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 and
50/52/54/56 Transport of Animals Rules, 1978.
6. FIR No. 100/2024 dated 15.04.2024 registered
by the Police Station Samba for alleged
commission of offence/s under section/s 188
Indian Penal Code read with 11 Prevention of
Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960.
07. In addition to the involvement of the petitioner in the
aforesaid FIRs, the Daily-Diary Reports of the Police Stations
(Police Post Sidhra) & Police Station Nagrota came to be
referred to highlight ongoing objectionable activities of the
petitioner in the matter of bovine smuggling.
08. Acting on the basis of the dossier and the materials
submitted therewith, the respondent No. 2- District Magistrate,
Jammu came to address a communication
No.DMJ/Judicial/2024-25/1758 dated 28.12.2024 to the
respondent No. 3 – Sr. Superintendent of Police (SSP), Jammu
citing therein that in the dossier as against the FIRs
mentioned, the conviction of the petitioner in two FIRs, being
the last ones, is said to have taken place with fine and,
therefore, whether any latest FIR/criminal case stood registered
against the petitioner to be considered for the purpose of his
preventive detention.
2025:JKLHC-JMU:2139
5 HCP No. 23/2025
09. This communication from the respondent No. 2 –
District Magistrate, Jammu to the respondent No. 3 – Sr.
Superintendent of Police (SSP), Jammu is an exhibit of the fact
that the respondent No. 2 – District Magistrate, Jammu
otherwise was not convinced, on the basis of dossier served, to
reckon a case made out for preventive detention of the
petitioner without there being any latest FIR/criminal case
reported against the petitioner.
10. Despite the aforesaid communication No.
DMJ/Judicial/2024-25/1758 dated 28.12.2024 from his end
to the respondent No. 3 – Sr. Superintendent of Police (SSP),
Jammu, the respondent No. 2 – District Magistrate, Jammu
still proceeded to pass detention Order No. PSA 32 of 2024
dated 28.12.2024 on the same very day of issuance of
communication No. DMJ/Judicial/2024-25/1758 dated
28.12.2024 to the respondent No. 3 – Sr. Superintendent of
Police (SSP), Jammu seeking input about any latest FIR/case
against the petitioner.
11. Thus, by a verbatim reproduction of the entire
dossier, the respondent No. 2 – District Magistrate, Jammu
came to formulate the grounds of detention to draw purported
subjective satisfaction therefrom and ordered the preventive
2025:JKLHC-JMU:2139
6 HCP No. 23/2025
detention of the petitioner directing his detention and custody
firstly in the Central Jail Kot Bhalwal, Jammu and then by
virtue of a Corrigendum No. DMJ/Judicial/2024-25/1812-16
dated 31.12.2024 in the District Jail, Udhampur.
12. The detention warrant issued pursuant to the said
detention Order No. PSA 32 of 2024 dated 28.12.2024 came to
be executed on 02.01.2025 by PSI Neeraj Parihar of Police
Station Nagrota who handed over the petitioner to the
Superintendent District Jail, Udhampur with an exercise of
handing over of 105 leaves compilation, comprising of warrant
of detention, notice of detention, grounds of detention, dossier
and the documents in support thereof to the petitioner who is
said to have been read over and explained the contents of the
detention order.
13. At the end of the respondent No. 2- District
Magistrate, Jammu, a Corrigendum No. DMJ/Judicial/2024-
25/1827-31 dated 02.01.2025 came to be issued by
mentioning place of detention of the petitioner to be District
Jail, Udhampur instead of Central Jail Kot Bhalwal, Jammu.
14. Thus, with effect from 02.01.2025, the petitioner is
under preventive detention custody which is meant for a period
of one year of which seven months have passed by.
2025:JKLHC-JMU:2139
7 HCP No. 23/2025
15. The petitioner came forward with the institution of
the present writ petition, assailing his preventive detention on
the basis of the grounds as mentioned in para 5(i) to (ix).
16. In the grounds, the petitioner has come forward
saying that he has been subjected to preventive detention
custody as a matter of punitive punishment so as to over-reach
the criminal courts seized of the criminal cases so obtaining
against the petitioner in the context of the FIRs mentioned in
the grounds of detention out of which for good number of FIRs
the petitioner came to be convicted with fine.
17. It is stated in the grounds of challenge that trial in
FIR No. 200/2017 of the Police Station Nagrota and FIR No.
141/2023 of the Police Station Kathua are pending before the
respective criminal courts, whereas the criminal cases related
to FIR No. 63/2017, FIR No. 136/2023, FIR No. 100/2024 and
FIR No. 18/2023, all stood disposed of by the respective
criminal courts.
18. It is in the aforesaid factual scenario that the
petitioner assails his preventive detention to be unwarranted,
misconceived and illegal.
19. When this Court examines the impugned order read
with its grounds of detention in juxtaposition with
2025:JKLHC-JMU:2139
8 HCP No. 23/2025
communication No. DMJ/Judicial/2024-25/1758 dated
28.12.2024 of the respondent No. 2 – District Magistrate,
Jammu to the respondent No. 3 – Sr. Superintendent of Police
(SSP), Jammu asking for something latest to be the basis for
seeking and serving preventive detention upon the petitioner, it
is the respondent No. 2 – District Magistrate, Jammu himself
who actually delivered a judgment that otherwise the dossier as
served by the respondent No. 3 – Sr. Superintendent of Police
(SSP), Jammu against the petitioner as it is was not bearing
any live basis for enabling the respondent No. 2 – District
Magistrate, Jammu to exercise jurisdiction of depriving the
petitioner of his fundamental right to personal liberty otherwise
reserved and protected under Article 21 of the Constitution of
India.
20. Since the petitioner was and is not privy to said
communication No. DMJ/Judicial/2024-25/1758 dated
28.12.2024 of the respondent No.2, but nevertheless the
grounds of challenge to the preventive detention posed by the
petitioner are almost on the same page.
21. The petitioner was having a handicap in not knowing
about said internal communication of the respondent No. 2 –
District Magistrate, Jammu to the respondent No. 3 – Sr.
2025:JKLHC-JMU:2139
9 HCP No. 23/2025
Superintendent of Police (SSP), Jammu, but since this Court is
having an access to the original file relating to the preventive
detention of the petitioner, as such, this Court is getting an
insight into the application of mind of the respondent No. 2 –
District Magistrate, Jammu himself not convinced by the text
and context of the dossier to subject the petitioner to preventive
detention under the Jammu & Kashmir Public Safety Act,
1978.
22. There is no doubt to the fact that the petitioner
seems to be a habitual offender as is borne out from his repeat
implications in the criminal cases of identical nature which
although are on the side of the law and order problem but on
any given occasion can cross over to become a public order
disturbance problem and for that the respondent No. 3 – Sr.
Superintendent of Police (SSP), Jammu or for that matter the
respondent No. 2 – District Magistrate, Jammu himself on the
basis of a dossier ought to have subjected the petitioner to
security proceedings under sections 127 and 128 of the
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 in order to
keep a check on the petitioner’s relapse in criminal activities of
the nature as attending his antecedents.
2025:JKLHC-JMU:2139
10 HCP No. 23/2025
23. Infact, the security proceedings under sections 127
and 128 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS),
2023 could have proved more effective in keeping a check on
the petitioner but it appears that the respondent No.2 – District
Magistrate, Jammu acted with a mechanical mindset to oblige
the respondent No. 3 – Sr. Superintendent of Police (SSP),
Jammu with preventive detention order of the petitioner under
the Jammu & Kashmir Public Safety Act, 1978 thereby
rendering it illegal and liable to be quashed as being without
any live basis.
24. Accordingly, this Court quashes the preventive
detention Order No. PSA 32 of 2024 dated 28.12.2024 passed
by the respondent No. 2 – District Magistrate, Jammu against
the petitioner read with consequent confirmation/approval
orders whatsoever passed and directs release of the petitioner
from preventive detention custody subject to the petitioner’s
furnishing personal as well surety bonds rupees five lac each to
be valid for a period of three years from the date of furnishing
of the said two bonds during the course of which if the
petitioner is booked and challaned for repeat occurrence of
offences of the nature for which the petitioner came to be
previously booked then, the petitioner shall be suffering
forfeiture of the bonds, personal as well as surety.
2025:JKLHC-JMU:2139
11 HCP No. 23/2025
25. Personal as well as surety bonds to be furnished
before the Superintendent, District Jail, Udhampur who shall
thereupon forward the same to the respondent No. 2 – District
Magistrate, Jammu for being taken on record to be referred to
at any appropriate point of time in future in case the petitioner
is found or gets to be booked in an identical criminal case.
26. Superintendent District Jail, Udhampur is directed to
release the petitioner upon securing the two bonds as directed
above.
27. Scanned copy of the detention record to be retained
and the original record to be returned back against proper
receipt.
28. Disposed of.
(RAHUL BHARTI)
JUDGE
SRINAGAR
04.08.2025
Muneesh
Whether the judgment is speaking : Yes
[ad_1]
Source link