J&K and Ladakh HC Quashes Preventive Detention Order, Holds Juvenile's Alleged Acts Cannot Found PSA Detention

Srinagar: The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has quashed a preventive detention order passed under the Jammu and Kashmir Public Safety Act against Zahid Ahmad Mir, holding that the detaining authority failed to point to any fresh activity by the detenue after his release on bail, and that the underlying FIR on which the detention was substantially founded related to conduct allegedly committed while the detenue was still a juvenile.

Background

The petitioner had challenged an order bearing No. 03/DMS/PSA of 2025, dated April 28, 2025, issued by the District Magistrate, Shopian, placing him under preventive detention to prevent him from acting in a manner prejudicial to the security of the Union Territory. The petitioner contended that the order was passed in breach of law, reflected total non-application of mind by the detaining authority, and rested on grounds that were vague and cryptic. It was further contended that no fresh activity had been attributed to the petitioner after his release on bail in FIR No. 97/2022, that the entire material relied upon by the detaining authority had not been supplied to him, and that he had not been informed of his right to file a representation against the detention.

The respondents contested the petition, asserting that the detenue was a hardcore Over Ground Worker of the Lashkar-e-Taiba and Hizbul Mujahideen terrorist organisations and a facilitator of their activities, and that he had remained in close contact with a jailed associate through encrypted social media applications. It was pleaded that all material relied upon had been furnished to the detenue and read over and explained to him, that he had been informed of his right to make a representation, and that all statutory and constitutional safeguards had been complied with.

The Grounds of Detention

The grounds of detention alleged that in 2022, the detenue, along with two associates, had conspired to kill non-local labourers at Chidren Keegam on the directions of a Pakistan-based handler, and that a pistol procured for this purpose had gone off accidentally, injuring one of the associates. This led to the registration of FIR No. 97/2022 for offences under Section 307 IPC, Sections 7/27 of the Arms Act, and Section 20 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act at Police Station Shopian. The detenue was subsequently released on bail in that FIR by the Juvenile Justice Board, Shopian, by order dated August 16, 2022.

The Court's Findings

On the absence of fresh activity: Justice Sanjay Dhar held that neither the grounds of detention nor the detention record produced by the respondents disclosed any particulars of activity allegedly undertaken by the petitioner after his release on bail in August 2022. The Court observed that no details of places, dates, or the nature of any fresh conduct had been furnished, and held that in the absence of such particulars or supporting material, the impugned order of detention becomes vulnerable and, as such, the same deserves to be set aside.

On the detenue's juvenile status: The Court noted that the detenue was, admittedly, a juvenile at the time of his arrest and subsequent release on bail in FIR No. 97/2022, a fact corroborated by a school communication placing his date of birth as October 15, 2006, making him under eighteen years of age at the relevant time. The Bench held that an illegal act committed by a juvenile cannot be permitted to stigmatise his future, and that such an act cannot subsequently form the basis of a preventive detention order, particularly since a juvenile cannot himself be detained under the Public Safety Act. In support of this proposition, the Court relied on its earlier decision in Tahir Riyaz Dar v. UT of J&K & Ors., LPA No. 121/2025, decided on 06.11.2025, holding that the detenue could not have been detained under preventive law for conduct alleged to have occurred while he was a minor.

Outcome

Holding that the impugned detention order was not sustainable in law, the Court allowed the petition, quashed the order of detention, and directed that the detenue be released from preventive custody forthwith, provided he was not required in connection with any other case. The detention record was directed to be returned to counsel for the respondents.

Case Details

Case: Zahid Ahmad Mir v. UT of J&K and Others
Court: High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh at Srinagar
Bench: Justice Sanjay Dhar
Case No.: HCP No. 91/2025
Statute Invoked: Jammu and Kashmir Public Safety Act
Counsel: M. A. Makroo for the Petitioner; Bikram Deep Singh, Dy. AG, for the Respondents
Date of Judgment: July 17, 2026
Key Precedent Relied Upon: Tahir Riyaz Dar v. UT of J&K & Ors., LPA No. 121/2025 (decided 06.11.2025)
Outcome: Detention order quashed; detenue directed to be released forthwith unless required in another case