J&K High Court Dismisses PIL Challenging Public Safety Act as Not Maintainable, Cites Ongoing Adjudication On Similar Issue
LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK
17 Oct 2024 11:31 AM IST
The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court, comprising Chief Justice Tashi Rabstan and Justice M A Chowdhary has dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) challenging the validity of the Jammu and Kashmir Public Safety Act (PSA), 1978. The court declared the PIL non-maintainable, citing that the issue of detention of citizens under the PSA was already under judicial consideration, making this litigation a parallel and redundant proceeding.
The PIL, filed by Syed Tassadque Hussain, a senior advocate and resident of Srinagar, brought to light the detention of approximately 2,000 people following lockdown measures and the filing of 253 habeas corpus petitions in the Jammu and Kashmir High Court. Among other reliefs, the petitioner sought the enforcement of amendments to Article 22 of the Constitution of India, which deals with protection against arbitrary arrest and detention.
The respondents, represented by Advocate General D.C. Raina, argued that the PIL was not maintainable on several grounds. Primarily, they emphasized that individuals detained under the PSA had already approached the court through habeas corpus petitions, challenging their detentions. This, the respondents contended, made the PIL a case of "double adjudication" on the same issue.
They also referenced authoritative pronouncements of the Supreme Court, particularly the landmark judgment of A.K. Roy vs. Union of India, to further substantiate the non-maintainability of the petition.
The High Court, after considering the submissions, noted that the issues raised in the PIL were already pending adjudication before the court in the form of habeas corpus petitions. The court observed,
"Since the issue of detention of citizens as raised in this petition is already pending adjudication before this Court, therefore, in our considered opinion, this PIL is not maintainable as being a parallel litigation."
The court further held that entertaining the PIL would amount to re-litigating the same issues that were already before the court through individual petitions filed by the detainees.
Dismissing the PIL on the grounds of non-maintainability, the court, however, granted liberty to individuals who had not yet filed challenges to their detention orders to approach the court.
Case Title: Syed Tassadque Hussain Vs Union Of India
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 276
