Sunday, September 20, 2026

Top 5 This Week

spot_img

Related Posts

J&K High Court: Juvenile-Era Allegations Cannot Be Revived Years Later to Justify Preventive Detention

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has held that conduct attributed to a person during their juvenile years cannot, by itself, be used as the foundation for a preventive detention order after they become an adult.

Justice Sanjay Dhar made the observation while quashing a preventive detention order issued against Zahid Ahmad Mir under the Jammu and Kashmir Public Safety Act, 1978.

The Court stressed that juvenile justice law is built around rehabilitation rather than permanent stigma. An act allegedly committed during childhood, it said, cannot be allowed to permanently define a person’s future.

“An illegal act committed by a juvenile does not stigmatize his future and likewise, an illegal act committed by a juvenile cannot form basis for issuance of a detention order subsequently.”

The case arose from a 2022 FIR in which Mir had been accused of involvement in a conspiracy to target and kill non-local labourers allegedly at the direction of a Pakistan-based handler. The case invoked provisions relating to attempt to murder, the Arms Act and the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act.

Mir was a juvenile when the alleged offences were registered and was subsequently granted bail by the Juvenile Justice Board.

Despite this, the District Magistrate, Shopian, passed a preventive detention order against him in April 2025. The authorities relied on the allegations from the earlier case to support the detention.

The High Court found the justification inadequate.

It noted that there was no material showing that Mir had engaged in any fresh criminal or prejudicial activity after being released on bail. In the absence of subsequent conduct, the Court held, allegations dating back to his juvenile years could not sustain preventive detention.

The Court observed that the detention record contained no particulars of any alleged activities by Mir after his release on bail and lacked material to support the detaining authority’s assertions.

Holding the detention order vulnerable, the High Court quashed it and directed that Mir be released.

Download Judgement

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Popular Articles