{"id":353686,"date":"2025-07-17T15:00:25","date_gmt":"2025-07-17T09:30:25","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=353686"},"modified":"2025-07-21T09:52:07","modified_gmt":"2025-07-21T04:22:07","slug":"detention-order-cannot-be-based-on-19-year-old-fir-jk-hc-legal-news","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/17\/detention-order-cannot-be-based-on-19-year-old-fir-jk-hc-legal-news\/","title":{"rendered":"19-year-old FIR cannot be the basis of a preventive detention order; J&amp;K and Ladakh HC quashes detention order"},"content":{"rendered":"<div style=\"text-align: justify; line-height: 150%;\">\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\"><span style=\"font-weight: bold;\">Jammu &amp; Kashmir and Ladakh High Court:<\/span> In the present petition, the petitioner challenged the detention order issued by the District Magistrate (\u2018detaining authority&#8217;) whereby her husband (\u2018detenue\u2019) was placed under preventive detention relying on an FIR lodged in 2006. There was also an unexplained delay in the execution of the detention warrant. A Single Judge Bench of <span style=\"font-weight: bold;\">M.A. Chowdhary, J.<\/span>, citing violation of the right to personal liberty, quashed the detention order and held that it was not permissible to pass such an order on references to the stale cases, after a period of 19 years.<\/p>\n<h3>Background &amp; Contentions:<\/h3>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">The petitioner contended that the detaining authority passed the detention order dated 6-11-2024, primarily based on an FIR registered 19 years ago in 2006 wherein the detenue was neither named nor sent for any trial. The copy of FIR was not supplied to the detenue, which prevented him from making an effective representation to the detaining authority and the order and grounds of the detention were also not explained to him. Further, there was an unexplained delay of 22 days in the execution of the detention warrant which was executed on 28-11-2024 showing that there was little to no apprehension in the minds of the respondents that the detenue could pose a threat to the public order or State security.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">The respondents, however, stated that the detenue was an Over Ground Worker and was arrested in the year 2003 for his involvement in militant activities; but due to lack of evidence, he was released. However, in 2006 again an FIR was filed against him wherein it was alleged that his activities were anti-national, anti-social and prejudicial to the security and peaceful atmosphere of the area and that there was a dire need to prevent the detenue from such activities. The respondents further submitted that the whole record along with the detention order and grounds of detention were handed over to the detenue and the same were read over and explained to him in the language he understood. Regarding the contention that there was a delay in the execution of the warrant, the respondents relied on the Public Safety Act, 1978 and stated that it did not stipulate any time limit for execution of the warrant.<\/p>\n<h3>Analysis and Decision:<\/h3>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">The Court observed that no cogent explanation was provided for the 22 days delay in the execution of the detention order which showed that there was no urgency for taking resort to preventive detention of the detenue. The Court referred to <span style=\"font-style: italic;\">Sushanta Kumar Banik<\/span> v. <span style=\"font-style: italic;\">State of Tripura<\/span>, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/TL57A9LC\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">2022 SCC OnLine SC 1333<\/a>, wherein the Supreme Court held that <span style=\"font-style: italic;\">\u201cany indifferent attitude on the part of the detaining authority or executing authority would defeat the very purpose of preventive detention and turn the detention order as a dead letter and frustrate the entire proceedings\u201d<\/span>. Further, the Court relied on <span style=\"font-style: italic;\">Sultan Abdul Kader<\/span> v. <span style=\"font-style: italic;\">Jt. Secy. to Govt. of India<\/span>, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/mA64t4mH\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">(1998) 8 SCC 343<\/a>, in which the Supreme Court observed that an unexplained delay in execution of the detention order was fatal, and held that the said order was rendered unsustainable in law.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">The Court cited <span style=\"font-style: italic;\">Sama Aruna<\/span> v. <span style=\"font-style: italic;\">State of Telangana<\/span>, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/vOvfe17H\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">(2018) 12 SCC 150<\/a>, and observed that the criminal cases registered in the year 2003 and 2006 could not have been the basis to invoke preventive detention, as the cases had no live and proximate link with the detention order passed in 2024 after a gap of more than 19 years.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">Another ground agitated on behalf of the detenue was that he was not provided with the whole material and that the contents of the detention warrant and the grounds thereof were not explained to him in the language he understood. The Court noted that though there was receipt on the record, but the copy of the FIR of the year 2006 was not provided to the detenue. Further, the Court observed that to substantiate the claims that the orders were duly explained, the respondents should have filed an affidavit by the executing officer to that effect.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">The Court opined that personal liberty was one of the most cherished freedoms, and therefore, the founding fathers enacted the safeguards in Article <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0001574961\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">22<\/a> of the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0002726967\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Constitution<\/a> to limit the power of the State to detain a person without trial. In a democracy governed by the rule of law, the drastic power of detention without trial for the security of the State or public order must be strictly construed. But, where individual liberty came into conflict with the interest of the security of the State or public order, then the liberty of the individual must give way to the larger interests of the nation.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">Consequently, the Court opined that the detaining authority had passed the order mechanically, in an arbitrary manner and without the application of mind and therefore, quashed the detention order directing the release of the detenue from preventive custody.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">[<span style=\"font-weight: bold; color: #632423;\">Shakia Kouser v. State (UT of J&amp;K), <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/bjuG8dr7\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">2025 SCC OnLine J&amp;K 709<\/a>, decided on 14-7-2025<\/span>]<\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<p>Advocates who appeared in this case:<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-left: 18pt;\"><span style=\"font-weight: bold;\">For the Petitioner<\/span>: Rupak Ratta, Advocate.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-left: 18pt;\"><span style=\"font-weight: bold;\">For the Respondents:<\/span> Dewakar Sharma, Dy. AG.<\/p>\n<h3 style=\"color: #000080;\">Buy Constitution of India \u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.ebcwebstore.com\/product\/the-constitution-of-india-coat-pocket-edition?products_id=100647\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">HERE<\/a><\/h3>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.ebcwebstore.com\/product\/the-constitution-of-india-coat-pocket-edition?products_id=100647\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"aligncenter size-large wp-image-294438\" src=\"https:\/\/s3.amazonaws.com\/ebcwebstore\/images\/the-constitution-of-india-coat-pocket-edition-Gopal-Sankaranarayanan-ebc-front-cover.JPG\" alt=\"Constitution of India\" width=\"300\" height=\"200\" \/><\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p style=\"font-style: italic;\">&#8220;In a democracy governed by the rule of law, the power to detain a person without trial, for security of the State or maintenance of public order must be strictly construed. But where individual liberty comes into conflict with the security of the State or public order, then the liberty of the individual must give way to the larger interests of the nation.&#8221;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67011,"featured_media":353695,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[49397,47233,85472,85468,32944,12931,85467,46667,73637,33049,85470,27064,3117,17941,85471,85469],"class_list":["post-353686","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-anti-national","tag-anti-social","tag-article-22-constitution","tag-delay-in-execution","tag-detaining-authority","tag-detention-order","tag-detention-warrant","tag-jammu-and-kashmir-and-ladakh-high-court","tag-justice-m-a-chowdhary","tag-live-and-proximate-link","tag-militancy-activities","tag-personal-liberty","tag-Preventive_Detention","tag-public-order","tag-public-safety-act-1978","tag-security-of-the-state"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v27.4 (Yoast SEO v27.4) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-premium-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Preventive detention over 19-year-old FIR is unsustainable: J&amp;K &amp; Ladakh HC | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"J&amp;K and Ladakh High Court quashes preventive detention order passed on the basis of FIR lodged 19 years ago.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/17\/detention-order-cannot-be-based-on-19-year-old-fir-jk-hc-legal-news\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"19-year-old FIR cannot be the basis of a preventive detention order; J&amp;K and Ladakh HC quashes detention order\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"J&amp;K and Ladakh High Court quashes preventive detention order passed on the basis of FIR lodged 19 years ago.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/17\/detention-order-cannot-be-based-on-19-year-old-fir-jk-hc-legal-news\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2025-07-17T09:30:25+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2025-07-21T04:22:07+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/preventive-detention-over-19-year-old-FIR.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"886\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"590\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"19-year-old FIR cannot be the basis of a preventive detention order; J&amp;K and Ladakh HC quashes detention order\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"5 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2025\\\/07\\\/17\\\/detention-order-cannot-be-based-on-19-year-old-fir-jk-hc-legal-news\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2025\\\/07\\\/17\\\/detention-order-cannot-be-based-on-19-year-old-fir-jk-hc-legal-news\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Editor\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\"},\"headline\":\"19-year-old FIR cannot be the basis of a preventive detention order; J&amp;K and Ladakh HC quashes detention order\",\"datePublished\":\"2025-07-17T09:30:25+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2025-07-21T04:22:07+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2025\\\/07\\\/17\\\/detention-order-cannot-be-based-on-19-year-old-fir-jk-hc-legal-news\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":860,\"commentCount\":0,\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2025\\\/07\\\/17\\\/detention-order-cannot-be-based-on-19-year-old-fir-jk-hc-legal-news\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2025\\\/07\\\/preventive-detention-over-19-year-old-FIR.webp\",\"keywords\":[\"Anti-National\",\"anti-social\",\"Article 22 Constitution\",\"delay in execution\",\"detaining authority\",\"detention order\",\"detention warrant\",\"Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court\",\"Justice M.A. Chowdhary\",\"live and proximate link\",\"militancy activities\",\"personal liberty\",\"Preventive Detention\",\"public order\",\"Public Safety Act 1978\",\"security of the State\"],\"articleSection\":[\"Case Briefs\",\"High Courts\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2025\\\/07\\\/17\\\/detention-order-cannot-be-based-on-19-year-old-fir-jk-hc-legal-news\\\/#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2025\\\/07\\\/17\\\/detention-order-cannot-be-based-on-19-year-old-fir-jk-hc-legal-news\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2025\\\/07\\\/17\\\/detention-order-cannot-be-based-on-19-year-old-fir-jk-hc-legal-news\\\/\",\"name\":\"Preventive detention over 19-year-old FIR is unsustainable: J&K & Ladakh HC | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2025\\\/07\\\/17\\\/detention-order-cannot-be-based-on-19-year-old-fir-jk-hc-legal-news\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2025\\\/07\\\/17\\\/detention-order-cannot-be-based-on-19-year-old-fir-jk-hc-legal-news\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2025\\\/07\\\/preventive-detention-over-19-year-old-FIR.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2025-07-17T09:30:25+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2025-07-21T04:22:07+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\"},\"description\":\"J&K and Ladakh High Court quashes preventive detention order passed on the basis of FIR lodged 19 years ago.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2025\\\/07\\\/17\\\/detention-order-cannot-be-based-on-19-year-old-fir-jk-hc-legal-news\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2025\\\/07\\\/17\\\/detention-order-cannot-be-based-on-19-year-old-fir-jk-hc-legal-news\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2025\\\/07\\\/17\\\/detention-order-cannot-be-based-on-19-year-old-fir-jk-hc-legal-news\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2025\\\/07\\\/preventive-detention-over-19-year-old-FIR.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2025\\\/07\\\/preventive-detention-over-19-year-old-FIR.webp\",\"width\":886,\"height\":590,\"caption\":\"preventive detention over 19-year-old FIR\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2025\\\/07\\\/17\\\/detention-order-cannot-be-based-on-19-year-old-fir-jk-hc-legal-news\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"19-year-old FIR cannot be the basis of a preventive detention order; J&amp;K and Ladakh HC quashes detention order\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\",\"name\":\"Editor\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Editor\"},\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/author\\\/editor_4\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Preventive detention over 19-year-old FIR is unsustainable: J&K & Ladakh HC | SCC Times","description":"J&K and Ladakh High Court quashes preventive detention order passed on the basis of FIR lodged 19 years ago.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/17\/detention-order-cannot-be-based-on-19-year-old-fir-jk-hc-legal-news\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"19-year-old FIR cannot be the basis of a preventive detention order; J&K and Ladakh HC quashes detention order","og_description":"J&K and Ladakh High Court quashes preventive detention order passed on the basis of FIR lodged 19 years ago.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/17\/detention-order-cannot-be-based-on-19-year-old-fir-jk-hc-legal-news\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2025-07-17T09:30:25+00:00","article_modified_time":"2025-07-21T04:22:07+00:00","og_image":[{"width":886,"height":590,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/preventive-detention-over-19-year-old-FIR.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Editor","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"19-year-old FIR cannot be the basis of a preventive detention order; J&amp;K and Ladakh HC quashes detention order","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Editor","Est. reading time":"5 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/17\/detention-order-cannot-be-based-on-19-year-old-fir-jk-hc-legal-news\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/17\/detention-order-cannot-be-based-on-19-year-old-fir-jk-hc-legal-news\/"},"author":{"name":"Editor","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe"},"headline":"19-year-old FIR cannot be the basis of a preventive detention order; J&amp;K and Ladakh HC quashes detention order","datePublished":"2025-07-17T09:30:25+00:00","dateModified":"2025-07-21T04:22:07+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/17\/detention-order-cannot-be-based-on-19-year-old-fir-jk-hc-legal-news\/"},"wordCount":860,"commentCount":0,"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/17\/detention-order-cannot-be-based-on-19-year-old-fir-jk-hc-legal-news\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/preventive-detention-over-19-year-old-FIR.webp","keywords":["Anti-National","anti-social","Article 22 Constitution","delay in execution","detaining authority","detention order","detention warrant","Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court","Justice M.A. Chowdhary","live and proximate link","militancy activities","personal liberty","Preventive Detention","public order","Public Safety Act 1978","security of the State"],"articleSection":["Case Briefs","High Courts"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/17\/detention-order-cannot-be-based-on-19-year-old-fir-jk-hc-legal-news\/#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/17\/detention-order-cannot-be-based-on-19-year-old-fir-jk-hc-legal-news\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/17\/detention-order-cannot-be-based-on-19-year-old-fir-jk-hc-legal-news\/","name":"Preventive detention over 19-year-old FIR is unsustainable: J&K & Ladakh HC | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/17\/detention-order-cannot-be-based-on-19-year-old-fir-jk-hc-legal-news\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/17\/detention-order-cannot-be-based-on-19-year-old-fir-jk-hc-legal-news\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/preventive-detention-over-19-year-old-FIR.webp","datePublished":"2025-07-17T09:30:25+00:00","dateModified":"2025-07-21T04:22:07+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe"},"description":"J&K and Ladakh High Court quashes preventive detention order passed on the basis of FIR lodged 19 years ago.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/17\/detention-order-cannot-be-based-on-19-year-old-fir-jk-hc-legal-news\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/17\/detention-order-cannot-be-based-on-19-year-old-fir-jk-hc-legal-news\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/17\/detention-order-cannot-be-based-on-19-year-old-fir-jk-hc-legal-news\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/preventive-detention-over-19-year-old-FIR.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/preventive-detention-over-19-year-old-FIR.webp","width":886,"height":590,"caption":"preventive detention over 19-year-old FIR"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/17\/detention-order-cannot-be-based-on-19-year-old-fir-jk-hc-legal-news\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"19-year-old FIR cannot be the basis of a preventive detention order; J&amp;K and Ladakh HC quashes detention order"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe","name":"Editor","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Editor"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/preventive-detention-over-19-year-old-FIR.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":273151,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/09\/06\/jk-and-ladakh-hc-number-of-acts-not-to-be-determined-for-detention-of-an-individual-but-impact-of-the-acts-preventive-detention\/","url_meta":{"origin":353686,"position":0},"title":"J&#038;K and Ladakh HC| Number of acts not to be determined for detention of an individual, but impact of the act(s) [Preventive Detention]","author":"Editor","date":"September 6, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"\u00a0 \u00a0 Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court: Moksha Khajuria Kazmi, J. dismissed a petition which was filed assailing the detention order in terms of Section (3) of Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1988 (\u2018NDPS Act\u2019) issued by the Divisional Commissioner, Kashmir (\u2018Detaining\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/JK-HC.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/JK-HC.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/JK-HC.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/JK-HC.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/JK-HC.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":225446,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/02\/11\/jk-hc-high-court-does-not-sit-in-appeal-over-decision-of-detaining-authority-and-cannot-substitute-its-own-opinion-over-that-of-detaining-authority-when-grounds-of-detention-are-precise-and-releva\/","url_meta":{"origin":353686,"position":1},"title":"J&#038;K HC | HC does not sit in appeal over decision of detaining authority and cannot substitute its own opinion, when grounds of detention are precise &#038; relevant","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"February 11, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Jammu and Kashmir High Court: Tashi Rabstan J., in a matter relating to preventive detention declined to provide opinion over that of detaining authority and reiterated that the object of preventive detention is not to punish a man but to prevent from any further acts. The present case relates to\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":301554,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/09\/15\/brother-militant-justifiy-preventive-detention-terrorism-pok-jammu-kashmir-ladakh-hc-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":353686,"position":2},"title":"Being brother of a militant, and lacking any ostensible activities disrupting public peace or security, cannot justify preventive detention: J&amp;K and Ladakh HC","author":"Sucheta","date":"September 15, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"The live and proximate link between the past conduct of the detenue and the imperative need to detain, must be harmonised to rely upon the alleged illegal activities of the detenue.","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"jammu and kashmir and ladakh high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/jammu-and-kashmir-and-ladakh-high-court-1.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/jammu-and-kashmir-and-ladakh-high-court-1.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/jammu-and-kashmir-and-ladakh-high-court-1.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/jammu-and-kashmir-and-ladakh-high-court-1.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":247740,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/04\/30\/jamat-i-islami\/","url_meta":{"origin":353686,"position":3},"title":"J&#038;K HC | [Jamat-i-Islami] HC quashes preventive detention order holding opportunity to effective representation an essential pre-requisite","author":"Editor","date":"April 30, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Jammu and Kashmir High Court: Sanjeev Kumar, J., heard the instant petition presented by the wife of the Petitioner to assail his detention ordered by District Magistrate, Pulwama under Preventive Detention law. The Bench opined, \u201cTwo FIRs, pertain to the offences under NDPS Act and, therefore, if the petitioner was\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":236917,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/08\/j-writ-petition-dismissed\/","url_meta":{"origin":353686,"position":4},"title":"J&#038;K HC | &#8216;Subjective satisfaction of a detaining authority to detain a person is not open to objective assessment by a Court\u02bc; Writ Petition dismissed\u00a0","author":"Editor","date":"October 8, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Jammu and Kashmir High Court: Tashi Rabstan, J., while dismissing a criminal writ petition seeking to challenge the grounds preferred for detention, said, \u201cA Court is not a proper forum to scrutinize the merits of administrative decision to detain a person.\u201d Brief Facts Petitioner in the instant case was arrested\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":311354,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/01\/12\/preventive-detention-fir-quashment-order-detenue-jk-ladakh-hc-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":353686,"position":5},"title":"J&amp;K and Ladakh HC quashes the detention order issued in 2022 based on an FIR registered against a detenue in 2004","author":"Editor","date":"January 12, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"The petitioner was detained in June 2022 based on a FIR registered against him in 2004. However, the petitioner had already been acquitted from the charges levied against him in 2004.","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"jammu and kashmir and ladakh high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/jammu-and-kashmir-and-ladakh-high-court-1.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/jammu-and-kashmir-and-ladakh-high-court-1.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/jammu-and-kashmir-and-ladakh-high-court-1.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/jammu-and-kashmir-and-ladakh-high-court-1.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/353686","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67011"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=353686"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/353686\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/353695"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=353686"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=353686"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=353686"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}