The Punjab and Haryana High Court on Thursday dismissed Khadoor Sahib MP Amritpal Singh’s plea challenging the legality of the third successive detention order issued against him on April 17 last year under the National Security Act.“It is clear as daylight the impugned order of preventive detention passed against the petitioner is immune from powers of judicial review. Consequently, the petition stands dismissed,” the Bench headed by Chief Justice Sheel Nagu observed in the open court while pronouncing the order in the open court.Related news: Punjab wants Amritpal Singh jailed in Assam beyond NSA limit; HC to hear plea todayAmritpal Singh had claimed in his petition that the detention was “arbitrary, void of jurisdiction and violative of constitutional safeguards under Articles 21 and 22”.His counsel had submitted that Amritpal Singh had remained under preventive detention since April 2023 despite the absence of any supporting material for continued incarceration.The Bench was also told that Amritpal Singh –– prior to his detention –– had been engaged social reform initiatives, including youth anti-addiction programmes, campaigns against drug abuse, and community-oriented interventions through his organisation Waris Punjab De. His speeches, the petition states, focused on Sikh values, cultural identity and constitutional protections rather than separatism or violence.The petitioner had further asserted that preventive detention could not be sustained merely on the strength of pending criminal cases, particularly when regular criminal proceedings were already underway before competent courts. It was stated that each FIR was being adjudicated independently and no overarching pattern or imminent threat was shown that could justify the invocation of the National Security Act.It was stated that the latest detention order was resting solely on an FIR registered on October 10, 2024.Amritpal Singh contended that his name did not appear in the FIR and his nomination was introduced later through a DDR dated October 18, 2024. He relied on the final report filed under Section 173 CrPC to assert that “there was not an iota of evidence” against him linking him to the incident alleged in the FIR. The petition claims that despite this, he was continuing to be confined in Central Jail, Dibrugarh.The petitioner had also rejected the allegation that he was associated with anti-national elements or was part of any design to physically eliminate individuals. It was asserted that such imputations were unsupported by any material.The State, on the other hand, had defended continuing preventive detention by referring to the “gravity and enormity of the threat posed by a hit list”. The Bench was told that his “close intimate association with dreaded terrorists and gangsters” formed the core of the detention order.Senior advocate Anupam Gupta on State’s behalf had submitted that the principal grounds of detention were twofold: the existence of a 15-member “hit list” and the petitioner’s alleged proximity to designated terrorists, including individual notified under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act.“If I were to attempt to describe the grounds of detention in a single line,” he told the court, “that would be the gravity and the enormity of the threat posed by the hit list, and the petitioner’s close intimate association with dreaded terrorists, terrorists and gangsters,” Gupta had submitted. Additional Solicitor-General of India Satya Pal Jain and counsel Dheeraj Jain represented the Centre.