The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh at Srinagar has quashed a preventive detention order against Anwar Jan (Choudhary), holding that the authorities failed to comply with mandatory constitutional safeguards before placing him under detention under the Jammu & Kashmir Public Safety Act, 1978.
A Division Bench of Justice Sanjeev Kumar and Justice Mohd Yousuf Wani also made significant observations on animal protection laws while dealing with allegations concerning bovine smuggling. The judgment was pronounced on September 24, 2026.
Background
Jan was detained by the District Magistrate, Anantnag, through an order dated December 1, 2025. He was already in custody in connection with FIR No. 121/2025 when the detention order was passed.
The record also referred to several earlier criminal cases and seven FIRs concerning alleged bovine smuggling, in which provisions of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 were invoked. An earlier preventive detention order against Jan had also been quashed in 2019.
The Single Judge had dismissed Jan’s habeas corpus petition and upheld the detention order. He therefore approached the Division Bench in appeal.
The Division Bench found that the detention order did not show that the detaining authority was aware that Jan was already in custody. The Court held that when a person is already behind bars, preventive detention requires material showing a real possibility of release and subsequent prejudicial activity.
The Bench also found that the detention order contained incorrect sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita in relation to FIR No. 121/2025. According to the judgment, the FIR contained three sections, while the detention order incorrectly mentioned five. The Court considered this a serious factual error indicating non-application of mind.
The Court further noted that the detention order was passed on December 1, 2025 but executed only on December 19, 2025. The authorities provided no explanation for the 18-day delay.
Another significant circumstance was that, even before the detention order was passed, a communication had been issued for lodging Jan at District Jail, Bhaderwah. The Bench held that this indicated that the decision to detain him had effectively been taken in advance.
While concluding the judgment, the Bench discussed the development of animal protection laws and the treatment of animals under Indian law. It noted that animals experience pain, stress and fear, while observing that existing legal provisions continue to provide very low monetary penalties for certain acts of cruelty.
The Court observed:
"Since these fines are so low, there is almost no fear of the law, which is why we see people committing acts of abuse just to post videos on social media for views. While the courts have agreed that animals deserve to live without suffering, the written law has not changed enough yet. For real change to happen, the law needs to officially recognize the animal feelings and replace those tiny fines with strict jail time and heavy penalties."
The Bench also observed that alleged bovine smuggling can affect religious sentiments and public tranquillity, but stressed that constitutional safeguards in preventive detention remain mandatory.
The Division Bench allowed the appeal and quashed the detention order dated December 1, 2025. It also allowed the habeas corpus petition and directed that Anwar Jan be set at liberty, if he was not required in any other case.
