Preventive Detention Cannot Be Invoked For Alleged Transport Of Bovine Animals Without Permit Unless Public Order Impacted: J&K&L High Court

The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has held that allegations relating to transportation of bovine animals without permission cannot, by themselves, justify preventive detention under the Jammu & Kashmir Public Safety Act, 1978 unless the detaining authority records satisfaction that such activities have resulted in or have the potential to cause public outrage or disturb public order.The Court was hearing a habeas corpus petition challenging a preventive detention order issued by the District Magistrate, Kathua under the Public Safety Act against the petitioner.Allowing the petition Justice Sanjay Dhar held that the grounds of detention did not disclose any satisfaction of the detaining authority that the alleged activities of the detenue had resulted in public outrage or had the potential to disturb public order. The Court observed, “Merely because the petitioner is alleged to be involved in the offences relating to transportation of bovine animals without permission is not a sufficient ground to invoke the remedy of preventive detention, particularly, in a case where the detaining authority has not recorded any subjective satisfaction that such activities of the detenue have either resulted or have the potential to lead to public outrage. The impugned order of detention is, therefore, unsustainable in law on this ground as well.”The petitioner, Kamal alias Kaka, filed the habeas corpus petition challenging the detention order issued by the District Magistrate, Kathua, whereby he was placed under preventive detention with a view to prevent him from continuing alleged criminal activities and to maintain public peace and order.The petitioner challenged the detention order on several grounds, including that the material relied upon for passing the detention order had not been furnished to him, thereby depriving him of the opportunity to make an effective representation. It was also contended that the grounds of detention were merely a reproduction of the dossier submitted by the Senior Superintendent of Police, Kathua and that the activities attributed to him did not constitute acts prejudicial to public order.Court's Observations:The Court noted that although several grounds had been raised in the petition, the principal arguments advanced by the petitioner revolved around two issues, the unexplained delay in passing the detention order and the absence of any material demonstrating that the alleged activities of the detenue affected public order.With regard to the delay, the Court observed that the dossier recommending detention had been forwarded by the Senior Superintendent of Police, Kathua on 16.05.2025, whereas the detention order was issued by the District Magistrate on 16.06.2025. The detaining authority had not furnished any explanation in the counter affidavit for the delay of one month, nor did the detention record disclose any correspondence between the detaining authority and the sponsoring agency during this period seeking clarification or further information, the Court pointed. Referring to its earlier decision in Javed Iqbal Itoo v. UT of J&K & Ors. (WP(Crl) No.153/2022), the Court reiterated that preventive detention presupposes immediacy and urgency in curtailing the liberty of a person. An unexplained delay in acting upon the dossier indicates that the situation was not of such emergent nature as to warrant preventive detention, the Court underscored. The Court further examined the grounds of detention and noted that they referred to eight FIRs registered against the petitioner, wherein the allegation against the petitioner was that he had transported bovine animals in violation of prohibitory orders issued by the District Magistrate. The respondents argued that repeated involvement in such activities could potentially create communal tension because cows are revered by a particular community.However, the Court noted that the detaining authority, while recording the grounds of detention, had not stated that the activities of the petitioner had the potential to hurt the religious sentiments of any community. The grounds merely contained a general statement that the activities of the petitioner created fear and insecurity among the public and disturbed public peace and harmony.The Court observed that in the absence of any recorded satisfaction by the detaining authority indicating that the alleged activities could cause communal tension or public outrage, it could not be concluded that the petitioner's acts had any nexus with disturbance of public order.The Court also referred to the decision of a Coordinate Bench in Bhupinder Kumar alias Pappu Krishan Lal v. UT of J&K & Ors. (AIR Online 2025 J&K 499), where it was observed that transportation of bovine animals without permission may amount to violation of orders issued by a public authority and may be dealt with under penal law, but such allegations do not automatically amount to “bovine smuggling” or constitute activities...

Preventive Detention Cannot Be Invoked For Alleged Transport Of Bovine Animals Without Permit Unless Public Order Impacted: J&K&L High Court

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Preventive Detention Cannot Be Invoked For Alleged Transport Of Bovine Animals Without Permit Unless Public Order Impacted: J&K&L High Court

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers