Research › Search › Judgment

J&K High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 2028 (JK)

Mudasir Ahmad Bhat v. Union Territory Of J&K

2026-03-12

Rahul Bharti

body2026
JUDGMENT RAHUL BHARTI, J. 01. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well for the respondents. Perused the pleadings i.e. the writ petition and the annexures therewith as well as the counter affidavit. Detention record produced from the end of the respondents by Mr. Furqan Yaqoob, learned GA also examined. 02. The best opening which adjudication of this case deserves to be put at first is the ever awakening words of renowned Scientist Albert Einstein saying that “ Whoever is careless with the truth in small matters cannot be trusted with the important matters.” 03. Exercise of jurisdiction under the Jammu & Kashmir Public Safety Act, 1978 is constitutionally meant and understood to be very serious jurisdiction which admits of no carelessness on the part of its handlers at any stage of but in the present case the respondents No. 1 to 3 are found to be acting in converse to the aforesaid saying of Mr. Albert Einstein. 04. This is a writ petition under article 226 of the Constitution of India filed on 27.05.2025 by the petitioner- Mudasir Ahmad Bhat, acting through his wife Mst. Shagufta Akhter, thereby seeking a writ of habeas corpus for quashment of preventive detention which came to be inflicted upon the petitioner by the respondent No. 2 – District Magistrate, Pulwama purportedly acting in exercise of jurisdiction under section 8 of the Jammu & Kashmir Public Safety Act, 1978 which resulted in curtailment of personal liberty of the petitioner with effect from 01.05.2025 when the petitioner came to be allegedly arrested and detained and continues to be so till coming of adjudication of this writ petition. 05. Sr. Superintendent of Police (SSP), Pulwama, by virtue of his letter No. CS/PSA/25/25-28 dated 28.04.2025, came to lay a dossier with respect to the petitioner thereby purportedly projecting before the respondent No. 2 – District Magistrate, Pulwama alleged state of activities of and on the part of the petitioner which were read and reckoned by the District Police as needed to be checked so as to prevent the petitioner from disturbing peace and carrying out further anti-national activities which warrant the preventive detention of the petitioner under the Jammu & Kashmir Public Safety Act, 1978 purely in the interest of security of the Country/Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir. 06. In the dossier, Sr. 06. In the dossier, Sr. Superintendent of Police (SSP), Pulwama came to refer the petitioner working as a salesman in a tin shop at Main Market, Pulwama and in his course of working and occupation getting in contact with anti-national workers, some killed terrorists and getting himself engaged in subversive/anti-national activities. 07. The petitioner was also referred to be a working potential OGW of active terrorist, namely, Ehsan-ul-Haq, providing all logistic support to him as well as to other terrorists whose floating movements were being observed in District Pulwama especially in Mitrigam area and providing them information about movement of Security Forces. 08. The petitioner was also reported to be luring young generation to get them engaged in anti-national activities and to join terrorist rank through his supporters. 09. In order to check the aforesaid alleged reported activities of the petitioner, he is said to have been called by the concerned Police Station twice on 28.02.2025 and 23.04.2025 by reference to authority under section 126/170 of BNSS but despite that the field reports provided that the petitioner was still providing all sort of assistance to active (local/FT) terrorists on account of being highly radicalized and sympathizer to terrorists having natural tendency to support terrorists engrossed in making unswerving efforts to influence the gullible minds of youngsters and make them to support the terrorists and terrorist organizations in order to promote the terrorism by every possible means with an aim to prepare the youth to join different terrorists folds in order to strengthen and revive their lost strength which otherwise has been crippled over past few years to create uncertainty in Kashmir Valley especially in Pulwama (Mitrigam area). 10. With aforesaid profiling and caricaturing of the petitioner in the dossier, Sr. Superintendent of Police (SSP), Pulwama solicited the preventive detention of the petitioner by issuance of an order from the respondent No. 2 – District Magistrate, Pulwama who, in turn on the basis of purported subjective satisfaction as formulated in the grounds of detention, came to hold that the petitioner’s activities run heavily against him and highly prejudicial to the security of the State thereby warranting the preventive detention of the petitioner. 11. 11. The respondent No. 2 – District Magistrate, Pulwama, based upon his subjective satisfaction as formulated in the grounds of detention, passed detention order No. 12/DMP/PSA/25 dated 30.04.2025 thereby ordering the preventive detention of the petitioner and his confinement in District Jail, Udhampur for a period to be specified by the Government. 12. Co-inciding with issuance of aforesaid detention order, the respondent No. 2 – District Magistrate, Pulwama, by virtue of a communication No. DMP/PSA/25/ 34-36 dated 30.04.2025, meant to apprise the petitioner about passing of the detention order against him and his right to file a representation to the District Magistrate, Pulwama as well as to the Government. 13. The detention order so issued against the petitioner came to be executed with alleged arrest of the petitioner purportedly taking place on 01.05.2025 when Sub Inspector Mohd. Yousuf, PID No. 911597/EXK of District Police Line, Pulwama detained the petitioner and handed over his person to the Superintendent District Jail, Udhampur on 01.05.2025 itself. 14. The petitioner is said to have been handed over nine (9) leaves compilation comprising of Copy of warrant (1 leaf), Notice of detention (1 leaf), Grounds of detention (2 leaves), Dossier (2 leaves), Copies of Istegasa (2 leaves), and Beat Report (1 leaf). 15. In addition, the petitioner is said to have been read over and explained the contents of grounds of detention in Urdu as well as Kashmir language which is said to have been understood by him and also apprised of his right to make a representation to the Government. 16. The aforesaid detention order so passed by the respondent No. 2 – District Magistrate, Pulwama came to be approved by issuance of Govt. Order No. Home/PB- V/876 of 2025 dated 08.05.2025 and the case referred to the Advisory Board for its opinion which came to be tendered on file No. Home/PB-V/207/2025 dated 21.05.2025 with Advisory Board’s finding that the preventive detention of the petitioner is fully justified. 17. It is at this stage of his detention that the petitioner had come forward with the present writ petition filed on 27.05.2025 assailing the exercise of jurisdiction at the end of the respondent No. 2 – District Magistrate, Pulwama in subjecting the petitioner to preventive detention and in this regard in writ petition in para 5, grounds of challenge came to be set out in sub-para (a) to (x). 18. By virtue of Govt. 18. By virtue of Govt. Order No. Home/PB-V/1053 of 2025 dated 30.05.2025 , the Govt. of UT of Jammu & Kashmir through its Home Department came to lend its confirmation to the preventive detention Order No. 12/DMP/PSA/25 dated 30.04.2025 of the respondent No. 2 – District Magistrate, Pulwama, and came to prescribe six months’ of detention period of the petitioner with effect from 01.05.2025 to 31.10.2025. 19. The petitioner came to submit a written representation dated 02.06.2025 thereby seeking recalling/ revocation of his preventive detention. 20. This representation was duly received and acknowledged by the Home Department, Govt. of UT of Jammu & Kashmir against receipt No. Home/PS/K/25/122 dated 02.06.2025 21. From the end of the Home Department. Govt. of UT of Jammu & Kashmir, in terms of communication No. Home/PBV/207/ 2025 dated 06.06.2025 , inputs were solicited from CID J&K in connection with the consideration of representation of the petitioner so submitted. 22. In response to aforesaid communication from the Home Department, Govt. of UT of Jammu & Kashmir, CID J&K, by virtue of its communication No. CID/SSP(A)/ BR/3-M/2018/PUL/3983 dated 15.07.2025, came to tender its inputs for facilitating the Home Department, Govt. of UT of Jammu & Kashmir to accord consideration to the representation of the petitioner. 23. Acting upon said inputs from CID J&K, the Home Department, Govt. of UT of Jammu & Kashmir by virtue of its communication No. Home/PB-V/207/2025/ (76448645) dated 23.07.2025 came to apprise the respondent No. 2 – District Magistrate, Pulwama about the rejection of the petitioner’s representation being devoid of merit. Copy of this communication was addressed to the Superintendent District Jail, Udhampur with a direction to inform the petitioner regarding the instant disposal of his representation with a further direction to furnish copy of receipt/acknowledgment of said disposal duly signed by the petitioner to the respondent No. 2 – District Magistrate, Pulwama as being the detaining authority and the Home Department, Govt. of UT of Jammu & Kashmir for the purpose of record without any fail. 24. In response to aforesaid direction of the Home Department, Govt. of UT of Jammu & Kashmir meant upon him, the respondent No. 3 – Superintendent District Jail, Udhampur by virtue of its communication No. DJU/MS/25/7791-94 dated 25.07.2025 addressed to the Additional Secretary to Govt. of UT of Jammu & Kashmir for the purpose of record without any fail. 24. In response to aforesaid direction of the Home Department, Govt. of UT of Jammu & Kashmir meant upon him, the respondent No. 3 – Superintendent District Jail, Udhampur by virtue of its communication No. DJU/MS/25/7791-94 dated 25.07.2025 addressed to the Additional Secretary to Govt. of Jammu & Kashmir, Home Department came to apprise the petitioner about the disposal of his representation in terms of communication No. Home/PB-V/207/2025/(76448645) dated 23.07.2025. 25. Counter affidavit to this petition came to be filed from the end of the respondent No. 2 – District Magistrate, Pulwama on 02.08.2025 whereafter this writ petition remained pending for hearing. 26. In the course of this pendency, by virtue of Govt. Order No. Home/PB-V/1950/2025 dated 28.10.2025 the petitioner’s detention period came to be further extended by another six months to last till 30.04.2026 27. It is aforesaid backdrop that this Court has come across with the adjudication of this writ petition when reference made in the very opening para of this judgment about the words of Albert Einstein come into play to expose in broad daylight the situation which can be summed up by observing that the respondents’ right hand not knowing what left hand is doing. 28. In this regard, this Court’s attention is drawn to the discordance between the factual reference in the Dossier of Sr. Superintendent of Police (SSP), Pulwama and the Grounds of detention formulated by the respondent No. 2 – District Magistrate, Pulwama. 29. In the Dossier, Sr. Superintendent of Police (SSP), Pulwama has referred to calling of the petitioner by a concerned police station twice on 28.02.2025 and 23.04.2025 under section 126/170 BNSS, without divulging which police station and full form of BNSS meaning what, but be that as it may, the respondent No. 2 – District Magistrate, Pulwama in his grounds of detention refers to two different dates of concerned police station calling the petitioner under section 126/170 BNSS and said two dates being 28.02.2025 and 23.02.2025 30. It has bothered least the application of mind on the part of the respondent No. 2 – District Magistrate, Pulwama to read very draft of his grounds of detention to come across with an error that there was no such calling of the petitioner on 23.02.2025 reported in the dossier of the Sr. Superintendent of Police (SSP), Pulwama. 31. It has bothered least the application of mind on the part of the respondent No. 2 – District Magistrate, Pulwama to read very draft of his grounds of detention to come across with an error that there was no such calling of the petitioner on 23.02.2025 reported in the dossier of the Sr. Superintendent of Police (SSP), Pulwama. 31. In very opening para of the writ petition, the petitioner, acting through his wife, has come up with an assertion that the Police Station Pulwama, without any justification and cause, had arrested the petitioner on 22.04.2025 which date at first glance left this Court speculating as to how the petitioner’s wife could come up with such a wild un-substantiated averment of petitioner being arrested on 22.04.2025 whereas the detention order against the petitioner came to be passed on 30.04.2025 and actual arrest of the petitioner being reported on 01.05.2025 . However, the truth comes sneaking out from the very correspondence of the respondent No. 3 – Superintendent District Jail, Udhampur which is communication No. DJU/MS/25/7791-94 dated 25.07.2025 addressed to the Additional Secretary to Govt. of Jammu & Kashmir, Home Department wherein the respondent No. 3 – Superintendent District Jail, Udhampur is on record saying that the petitioner is lodged in District Jail, Udhampur with effect from 05.12.2024 meaning thereby even prior to date 22.04.2025 as asserted by the petitioner in his writ petition. 32. Very disturbingly, the respondent No. 3 – Superintendent District Jail, Udhampur refers to the lodgment of the petitioner in District Jail, Udhampur with effect from 05.12.2024 under the J&K Public Safety Act, 1978 by reference to the very impugned order of the respondent No. 2 – District Magistrate, Pulwama which is Order No. 12/DMP/PSA/25 dated 30.04.2025 33. Copy of aforesaid communication of the respondent No. 3 – Superintendent District Jail, Udhampur was duly addressed to the respondent No. 2 –District Magistrate, Pulwama as well. 34. Thus, it occurred to none i.e. Additional Secretary to Govt. of Jammu & Kashmir, Home Department as well as the respondent No. 2 – District Magistrate, Pulwama to bother their attention and concern by calling upon the respondent No. 3 – Superintendent District Jail, Udhampur as to on what basis he came to reflect the fact of petitioner’s lodgment in Jail with effect from 05.12.2024 35. of Jammu & Kashmir, Home Department as well as the respondent No. 2 – District Magistrate, Pulwama to bother their attention and concern by calling upon the respondent No. 3 – Superintendent District Jail, Udhampur as to on what basis he came to reflect the fact of petitioner’s lodgment in Jail with effect from 05.12.2024 35. The aforesaid scenario only reflects that there is no one at the end of the respondents bearing alertness and aliveness to the handling of preventive detention cases which seem to be left to be attended to by the subordinate staff at the disposal of Home Department, Govt. of UT of Jammu & Kashmir as well as District Magistracy otherwise it is inconceivable that glaring errors of such nature would have been spared attention and correction at the end of the respective respondents. 36. This Court is holding back its further observations to come to a conclusion that the preventive detention inflicted upon the petitioner is painful and pinching to the very constitutional sensitivity with which preventive detention jurisdiction is supposed to be exercised and carried out. 37. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the preventive detention of the petitioner is hereby declared illegal rendering the impugned detention Order No. 12/DMP/PSA/25 dated 30.04.2025 passed by the respondent No. 2 – District Magistrate, Pulwama read with consequent approval/confirmation/extension orders passed by the Home Department, UT of Jammu & Kashmir which are also held and declared to be illegal and are, accordingly, quashed. 38. The Superintendent District Jail, Udhampur is directed to restore the petitioner to his personal liberty forthwith. 39. Disposed of.