Srinagar: The J&K High Court on Wednesday directed state government to provide legal aid to detainees booked under Public Safety Act.
The direction came as a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by senior advocate Syed Tassadque Hussain sought striking down of Public Safety Act, 1978, while describing it an “illegal act” as “amendments made to the Article 22 of the Constitution of India some four decades back were not been brought into force in the state of J&K and is thus violating Article 21 of the constitution”.
Chief Justice Gita Mittal and Justice Rashid Ali Dar while hearing the matter directed Member Secretary, Legal Services Authority to provide legal aid to the detainees who cannot afford to engage a counsel.
Advocate General DC Raina told the court that under Reorganization Act 2019, the PIL was not maintainable. The court then directed Hussain to see the Act and listed the matter for November 6, 2019.
The amendment of Article 22 cited by the PIL says that no law providing for preventive detention shall authorise the detention of a person for a longer period than two months unless an advisory board constituted in accordance with the recommendations of the chief justice of the appropriate high court has reported before the expiration of the said period of two months.
It adds that an advisory board shall consist of a chairman and not less than two other members and the chairman shall be a serving judge of the appropriate high court and the other members shall be a serving or retired judge of any high court.
Hussain said that the amendment has not been brought into force in J&K and if done the J&K PSA, 1978 will have to be struck down.
The court was told that since the lockdown (August) more than 2000 detentions have been made and around 300 habeas corpus petitions filed before high court.
The PIL added that even the section 8 of the J&K PSA, 1978 was “illegal” as the divisional commissioners or district magistrates have been granted power to detain a person, “as detention of a person is a sovereign function of the state under Government of India Act, 1935”.
It also argued that it was illegal to shift any person to any other place without hearing him and the Government has to confirm the grounds of detention if the order is made by any officer.
The PIL asked for striking down the Act, and sought token compensation of Rs 5 lakh for persons detained after August 5.

NUSRAT SIDIQ