JUDGMENT 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as for the respondents. 2. Perused the pleadings and also the detention record produced. 3. The petitioner-Ehtsham ul Haq Dar, through his father-Syeed Hussain Dar filed this writ petition on 21.05.2025 bearing a prayer for issuance of a writ of habeas corpus to quash the preventive detention order issued by the respondent No. 2-District Magistrate, Bandipora whereby the petitioner came to be detained under the Jammu & Kashmir Public Safety Act, 1978. 4. Respondent No. 2-District Magistrate, Bandipora by virtue of order No. 08/DMB/PSA of 2025 dated 03.05.2025 acting in response to the dossier submitted by the Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP), Bandipora vide his letter No. Lg1/PSA-12/2025/26451-57 dated 30.04.2025, came to hold that the petitioner’s alleged reported state of activities being in state of personal liberty were prejudicial to the maintenance of public order warranting his detention under the Jammu & Kashmir Public Safety Act, 1978. 5. On account of the said detention No. 08/DMB/PSA of 2025 dated 03.05.2025 the petitioner was ordered to be detained and kept in District Jail, Kishtwar. 6. In the dossier, the only criminal antecedent reported against the petitioner is of a criminal case borne out of FIR No. 30/2020 of Police Station, Aragam by reference to which the petitioner is said to have been enlarged on bail but without bearing any further recital as to the status of the case. 7. Furthermore, the dossier bears a very vague reference that petitioner was earlier detained under the "Public Safety Act" on 06.03.2021 and released on 05.03.2022 after expiry of his detention period, without bearing any mention about the detention order so passed in 2021. 8. The dossier profiled the petitioner to be participant in anti-national activities as an Over Ground Worker (OGW) of a banned terrorist organization. 9. Literally lifting the print and text of the dossier, the respondent No. 2-District Magistrate, Bandipora purportedly formulated the so-called grounds of detention more as a mouthpiece of the Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP), Bandipora and passed the detention order. 10. On the basis of the detention order so issued, the petitioner came to be detained on 06.05.2025. 11. 9. Literally lifting the print and text of the dossier, the respondent No. 2-District Magistrate, Bandipora purportedly formulated the so-called grounds of detention more as a mouthpiece of the Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP), Bandipora and passed the detention order. 10. On the basis of the detention order so issued, the petitioner came to be detained on 06.05.2025. 11. By virtue of Advisory Board opinion dated 02.06.2025 the petitioner’s preventive detention was held to be based on sufficient cause, as a result whereof, by virtue of Government Order No. Home/PB-V/1220 of 2025 dated 12.06.2025 the detention order of the petitioner was confirmed and the petitioner was ordered to be detained for the first three months w.e.f. 06.05.2025 to 05.08.2025. 12. The petitioner’s representation submitted and received on 20.05.2025 remained pending consideration at the end of the Government of Jammu & Kashmir. 13. By virtue of Government Order No. Home/PB-V/1505 of 2025 dated 31.07.2025 the petitioner’s detention period was further extended for another three months up to 05.11.2025. 14. The detention record does not bear any further extension of the petitioner’s detention period. When this Court examines the basis of the petitioner’s preventive detention, this Court cannot escape from the fact that the entire edifice is based on vague and conjectured assumptions without any iota of factual content except the criminal case related to FIR No. 30/2020 that too without specifying as to whether the trial of the said case has ended or still in currency, meaning thereby the Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP), Bandipora and District Magistrate, Bandipora did not have the concern and anxiety to fetch and provide full details relatable with the petitioner before venturing to curtail his personal liberty. 15. A fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution of India is not so fragile and weak footed that by purported reference to any casual exercise at the end of the Authorities under the Jammu & Kashmir Public Safety Act, 1978 the said fundamental right of the petitioner could be uprooted. 16. 15. A fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution of India is not so fragile and weak footed that by purported reference to any casual exercise at the end of the Authorities under the Jammu & Kashmir Public Safety Act, 1978 the said fundamental right of the petitioner could be uprooted. 16. The dossier as well as grounds of detention are word to word replicas of each other thereby exhibiting that there was no application of mind on the part of the Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP), Bandipora as well as the respondent No. 2-District Magistrate, Bandipora except a unity of mind that the petitioner needs to be detained on one false pretext or another, unmindful of the constitutional obligation of resorting to preventive detention jurisdiction with due caution and circumspection. 17. In light of the aforesaid, the preventive detention order No. 08/DMB/PSA of 2025 dated 03.05.2025 read with approval/confirmation/extension order by the Government of Union Territory of J&K, are held to be illegal and the same are hereby quashed. 18. The Superintendent of the concerned Jail detaining the petitioner is directed to release the petitioner forthwith, if not required in any other case.