news details |
|
|
| Alleged LeT militant’s detention quashed | | | EARLY TIMES REPORT
JAMMU, Nov14: Allowing the habeas corpus petition filed by the father of alleged dreaded terrorist of LeT detained under PSA by the order of District Magistrate, Ramban, Justice Virender Singh of J&K High Court Jammu Wing today ordered immediate release of Riyaz Ahmed son of Abdul Rashid resident of Bun Dachan Gool, if not required in any other case.
The alleged militant was arrested under PSA following his involvement in several subversive activities and hurling grenade on the police party at Moori Dachan resulting in the death of a head constable Gulzar Hussain and injuries to ASI Duni Chand and Constable Nissar Hussain on October 7, 2007. He was also charged of unleashing terrorism of high intensity in the state and other parts of the country, with the sole motive to liberate and secede J&K State from the Union of India by indulging in subversive and disruptive activities against the state and to inculcate separatist feelings and create disturbances, disruptions, panic, scare and terror amongst peace loving people and to cause killings of innocent people whom they considered as an obstruction in the achievement of their nefarious designs. The detenue was apprehended by the STF Gool on October 29, 2006 during the operation that took place in Kalawali Sildhar. One 303 rifle modified, 11 cartridges and one magazine were recovered and on this ground the detenue was detained under Public Safety Act.
Justice Virender Singh, while allowing the habeas corpus petition heard Adv Sheikh Altaf Hussain appearing for the detenue and AAG SC Gupta appearing for the state, observed that there is delay of 15 days in executing the detention order, no explanation whatsoever has been brought on record for the said delay. Undisputedly the unexplained delay vitiates the detention order and therefore, duty is cost upon the detaining authority to explain the delay, if the order is not executed within the statutory period. This has been considered to be a vital flaw and enough by itself to quash the detention order. The detention order deserves to be quashed yet on another count, non-application of mind by the detaining authority; the detenue was arrested in a case of substantive offences on October 29, 2006. He was subsequently arrested in another case on January 9, 2007. The detention order was passed on November 7, 2007 after the lapse of more than one year. With these observations Court allowed the petition and directed the respondents to release the detenue forthwith, if not required, in any other case. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
