An accused person having been granted bail in criminal cases cannot be grounds to invoke a preventive detention law against him, the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh has said.
A division bench of Acting Chief Justice Tashi Rabstan and Justice MA Choudhary made the remarks on Thursday as it quashed the detention of former Srinagar Municipal Corporation corporator Aqib Ahmad Renzu under the Public Safety Act.
The Public Safety Act is a preventive detention law under which persons can be taken into custody to prevent them from acting against “the security of the state or the maintenance of the public order” in the Union territory.
Renzu, who was facing multiple criminal charges, was granted bail in seven first information reports between 2013 and 2023.
However, he was detained under the Public Safety Act in October last year. This came a week after he was arrested in a sexual harassment case, Bar and Bench reported. The detaining authorities claimed that his detention was necessary to prevent him from engaging in activities detrimental to public order.
Subsequently, the former corporator filed a petition in the court to quash his preventive detention.
On Thursday, the High Court noted that the fact that Renzu was granted bail in the criminal cases did not constitute grounds to invoke the Public Safety Act against him. Ordinary criminal laws were sufficient to address the criminal complaints against him, it added.
The court also said that the grounds cited to place Renzu in preventive detention using the Public Safety Act did not indicate any activity defined under Section 8(3), which pertains to a threat to public order.
“The allegations may amount to law and order issue but he cannot be held to have disturbed the public order,” the court said.
On June 7, a single judge of the same court had set aside a petition filed by Renzu against his detention, Bar and Bench reported. The single judge had held that the former corporator’s participation in “nationalist activities” did not give him the permission to indulge in criminal activities.
During the proceedings before the division bench, advocate Shuja ul Haq, representing Renzu, said that the former corporator worked shoulder to shoulder with the government to restore peace and development in Kashmir, and was a part of mainstream politics.
Haq also said that the single-judge did not look into the fact that Renzu was not a “stone-pelter” or an “anti-national” element as claimed by the detaining authority.
He noted that the previous order of the single judge did not take into account that Renzu was not given all of the material used by the detaining authority to issue his preventive detention. This affected his right to make an effective representation against his detention, Haq said, according to Bar and Bench.
The division bench of the High Court, while quashing Renzu’s detention, said it was clear all the relevant documents were not given to him to enable him to challenge the action against him.
Limited-time offer: Big stories, small price. Keep independent media alive. Become a Scroll member today!
Our journalism is for everyone. But you can get special privileges by buying an annual Scroll Membership. Sign up today!