Agencies
New Delhi, Feb 26: The Supreme Court on Wednesday sought response from the Jammu and Kashmir administration on a plea by Iltija Mufti, daughter of former chief minister Mehbooba Mufti, challenging the detention of her mother under the Public Safety Act (PSA).
A bench headed by Justice Arun Mishra asked Iltija to give an undertaking to bring on record that she has not filed any other petition before any other judicial forum, including the high court, in connection with the detention of her mother.
The top court has listed the matter for further hearing on March 18.
Iltija had filed a habeas corpus, a writ petition seeking direction from court to the authorities to produce a person under illegal detention in the top court against the February 5 administrative order invoking the PSA provision against her mother, leading to her detention.
The same bench had earlier issued notice to the Jammu and Kashmir Union Territory administration on a similar plea filed by Sara Abdullah Pilot challenging government notification invoking the PSA against her brother and former Chief Minister Omar Abdullah.
The bench, also comprising Justices Vineet Saran and M.R. Shah, asked Iltija’’s counsel Nitya Ramakrishnan why she did not move the High Court. The counsel contended that the apex court had already entertained a similar plea of another former chief minister of the erstwhile state, Omar Abdullah.
“The impugned detention order is wholly based on the impugned dossier which is manifestly biased, slanderous and libelous against the detenu and which no reasonable person ought to rely on for depriving a citizen of her fundamental freedoms and person liberty”, said Iltija’’s plea citing the dossier, which formed the basis for invocation of the PSA.
The plea contended that the grounds for the detention are not only stale, “for they refer to utterances more than six months old and admittedly made with no adverse consequences to law and order, but are also vitiated for non-application of mind insofar as they fail to show as to why the said utterances pose a threat to public order”, contended the plea.
“The very fact that not even an FIR was registered at that time demonstrates that the utterances were and are unexceptional”, said the plea urging the top court to quash the February 5 detention order. |
