Smuggling Of Bovine Animals Is A Threat To Public Order & Hurts Religious Sentiments: J&K&L HC Upholds Preventive Detention Order
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court upheld the preventive detention of a man who was accused of smuggling bovine animals, specifically cows and calves.
He was detained under the Jammu and Kashmir Public Safety Act (PSA) in March 2024. In response to his detention, his mother filed a petition challenging the preventive detention order on several grounds.
A Bench of Justice Moksha Khajuria Kazmi ruled that the act of smuggling cattle posed not just a law and order issue but also a threat to public order, particularly because such activities hurt the religious sentiments of certain communities.
The Court explained, "Bovine animals include cows and calves and their illegal smuggling is always viewed by one community only for the purpose of slaughter and, therefore, there is a feeling amongst the people belonging to such community, that the activity hurts their religious sentiments,"
The Court added, "The activities of the detenue, against whom number of FIRs stand registered for illegal smuggling of bovine animals, have the potential to disturb even tempo of current life of the community and not only poses law and order problem but would also be a threat to the maintenance of public order in the area,"
Advocate Gagan Oswal appeared for the petitioner, while Additional Advocate General Rajesh Thappa appeared for the Respondent.
His lawyer contended that the normal criminal justice system was sufficient to address his alleged offenses, and that preventive detention was an abuse of the legal process.
In defense, the government argued that he was a habitual and hardened criminal involved in multiple criminal activities, including stabbing, rioting, and bovine smuggling. The authorities claimed that he had instilled fear among the local population and that his criminal acts were detrimental to public order.
To determine whether his preventive detention was justified, the Court referenced the Supreme Court’s decision in R Kalavathi v. State of Tamil Nadu (2006), which emphasized that the crucial factor in such cases is not the specific nature of the detainee’s acts but their potential to disturb public life and order. In this case, the Court found that his activities were indeed capable of causing such disruption, thereby justifying his detention.
The Court also dismissed the claim that the procedural safeguards were violated. It noted that his detention order was read to him in Hindi and Dogri, languages he understood, and that it was his own fault for failing to file a timely representation against his detention.
As a result, the Court rejected the petition challenging his preventive detention and upheld the government’s decision to detain him under the PSA.
Cause Title: Shakeel Mohd v. Union Territory of J&K & Anr.
