The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has raised doubts over whether a Public Interest Litigation filed by former Chief Minister Mehbooba Mufti can be maintained, after she sought the return of J&K undertrial prisoners currently lodged in jails outside the Union Territory.
A Bench comprising Chief Justice Arun Palli and Justice Rajnesh Oswal, while hearing the matter, noted that Mufti’s counsel had sought additional time to prepare arguments. But before that, the judges pressed a fundamental question — how exactly was the petitioner herself “aggrieved” by the issue she had brought before the court?
The query came after Advocate Aditya Gupta, appearing for the PDP chief, argued that hundreds of J&K residents were moved to prisons across India following the abrogation of Article 370 in 2019. He said the relocation made family visits, legal consultations, and participation in trials nearly impossible for those detainees — many of whom belong to financially struggling families.
“This is not just a matter of inconvenience; it turns the trial process itself into a form of punishment,” Gupta submitted.
The Bench, however, was not immediately convinced. It asked pointedly, “What is the meaning of PIL? How are you aggrieved?” and referred to past judicial rulings that define who has the standing to file such petitions.
While the judges remarked that the Court had “opened one door” to hear the plea, they clarified that the petition had not yet been admitted, and Mufti’s locus standi would have to be established before any progress could be made.
Mufti’s petition argues that detaining J&K undertrials in faraway prisons violates their fundamental rights under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution. It also draws on Supreme Court judgments and the Model Prison Manual, underscoring what she calls the State’s constitutional and humanitarian duty to ensure fair treatment of prisoners.
The case is scheduled to be heard again on November 18.
