The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has set aside the preventive detention of Pulwama resident Mudasir Ahmad Bhat, holding that the authorities failed to exercise the level of care required in cases involving personal liberty.
Justice Rahul Bharti observed that preventive detention powers under the Jammu & Kashmir Public Safety Act, 1978 must be handled with strict attention and accuracy, and the record in this case showed serious inconsistencies.
Read also:- Chhattisgarh High Court Quashes Criminal Complaint Against Judges, Says Allegations Based
Background of the Case
The case arose from a habeas corpus petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging a preventive detention order issued against Mudasir Ahmad Bhat. The petition was filed through his wife, Shagufta Akhter, on 27 May 2025.
The detention order had been passed by the District Magistrate, Pulwama on 30 April 2025 under Section 8 of the Public Safety Act. According to the authorities, the action was based on a dossier submitted by the Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP), Pulwama.
The police dossier alleged that Bhat, who worked as a salesman in a tin shop at Pulwama market, had connections with militants and was acting as an overground worker (OGW) for an active militant named Ehsan-ul-Haq. He was also accused of providing logistical support to militants and influencing local youth to join militant ranks.
Read also:- J&K High Court Quashes Drug Case Against Pharma MD After Delay Denied Right to Retest Sample
Based on these allegations, the District Magistrate ordered his preventive detention and directed that he be lodged in District Jail, Udhampur.
The detention order was later approved by the Jammu & Kashmir government and referred to the Advisory Board, which found the detention justified.
Subsequently, the government confirmed the detention for six months from 1 May 2025 to 31 October 2025.
Bhat later submitted a representation seeking revocation of his detention, but the Home Department rejected it after obtaining inputs from the CID.
During the pendency of the case before the High Court, the government further extended his detention until 30 April 2026.
While examining the detention record, the High Court found several inconsistencies and procedural lapses in the way the detention order was handled.
Justice Rahul Bharti began the judgment with a quote from Albert Einstein, remarking:
“Whoever is careless with the truth in small matters cannot be trusted with the important matters.”
Read also:- Calcutta High Court Enhances Compensation for Parents Who Lost Two Sons in 2015 Road Accident
The court noted that the dates mentioned in the police dossier and the grounds of detention did not match. While the dossier referred to two instances when the petitioner was called to the police station-28 February 2025 and 23 April 2025-the detention order incorrectly mentioned 23 February 2025 instead of 23 April 2025.
The judge observed that such discrepancies indicated a lack of proper application of mind by the detaining authority.
Another serious inconsistency emerged from correspondence by the Superintendent of District Jail, Udhampur. The communication stated that the petitioner had been lodged in jail since 5 December 2024, even though the detention order itself was issued only on 30 April 2025.
The court found this contradiction deeply troubling and pointed out that neither the Home Department nor the District Magistrate questioned the basis of this statement.
Justice Bharti remarked that the situation reflected a troubling lack of alertness and responsibility in handling preventive detention cases.
“Preventive detention jurisdiction is constitutionally serious and admits of no carelessness at any stage,” the court observed.
After reviewing the record, the High Court concluded that the detention order suffered from serious procedural flaws and lack of due care by the authorities.
The court held that the preventive detention of Mudasir Ahmad Bhat was illegal and quashed the detention order dated 30 April 2025, along with all subsequent approval, confirmation, and extension orders issued by the government.
The Superintendent of District Jail, Udhampur was directed to restore the petitioner’s personal liberty forthwith.
Case Title: Mudasir Ahmad Bhat vs Union Territory of J&K and Others
Case Number: HCP No. 147/2025
Decision Date: 12 March 2026
