Jammu Kashmir High Court Dismisses Habeas Corpus Plea of Sopore Man, Upholds Detention Under PSA | Kashmir Life

SRINAGAR: The High Court of Jammu Kashmir and Ladakh has upheld the preventive detention of a Sopore resident under the Public Safety Act (PSA), dismissing a habeas corpus petition challenging the detention order.

The judgment was delivered by Justice MA Chowdhary in HCP No. 228/2024, reserved on April 16, 2026, and pronounced on April 22, 2026.

The petition was filed by Ahsan-ul-Haq Khanday, son of Nazir Ahmad Khanday, a resident of Nowpora Kalan, Sopore, through his wife Sabiya. He was represented by Advocate Mohammad Wajid Haseeb. The respondents, including the Union Territory of JK through its Home Department, District Magistrate Baramulla, and Superintendent of Police Sopore, were represented by Deputy Advocate General Hakeem Aman Ali.

The petitioner challenged detention Order No. 35/DMB/PSA/2024 dated May 16, 2024, issued by the District Magistrate, Baramulla, under Section 8 of the Jammu and Kashmir Public Safety Act, 1978. The detention was ordered with a view to preventing the detenue from acting in a manner prejudicial to the security of the Union Territory.

The plea sought quashing of the detention on grounds that it was based on vague and unsubstantiated allegations, that relevant material had not been supplied to the detenue, and that he had not been properly informed of his right to make a representation. It was also argued that the detention order relied on stale grounds and was legally unsustainable.

Opposing the petition, the District Magistrate contended that the detention was preventive in nature and based on sufficient material indicating the detenue’s continued involvement in activities prejudicial to public order and security. It was submitted that ordinary criminal law had proven inadequate to deter his conduct.

The court, after hearing both sides and examining the record, noted that the detenue had earlier been booked in FIR No. 82/2021 under Section 506 IPC and Section 13 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act at Police Station Sopore, and had been released on bail. However, authorities alleged that he continued involvement in anti-national activities thereafter.

As per the detention record, the detenue was described as an overground worker (OGW) associated with militant operatives linked to Hizbul Mujahideen and The Resistance Front (TRF). He was alleged to have been in contact with a Pakistan-based handler and to have used dark web applications for coordination.

The court observed that the detention order, grounds of detention, dossier, FIR copies, and other material had been duly supplied to the detenue and explained to him in a language he understood. It held that the procedural safeguards under law had been complied with, rejecting the contention that the detenue was denied the opportunity to make an effective representation.

On the argument of stale grounds, the court noted that the detenue had a history of involvement in multiple cases registered at Police Station Sopore between 2009 and 2021 and had also been previously detained under the PSA in 2019. It held that the material on record indicated continuity of activities prejudicial to security.

Justice Chowdhary reiterated settled legal principles governing preventive detention, observing that such detention is not punitive but preventive in nature, aimed at averting threats to public order and national security. The court emphasized that judicial review in such cases is limited to examining procedural compliance and not the sufficiency of grounds forming the detaining authority’s subjective satisfaction.

Finding no illegality or procedural lapse in the detention order, the court dismissed the petition and upheld the detention.

“Viewed from any angle, I do not find any illegality or impropriety in the impugned detention order,” the court held, concluding that the plea was devoid of merit.