Srinagar, Sep 8: The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has quashed the preventive detention of Kupwara-based academic scholar Shafat Maqbool Wani under the Public Safety Act, holding that the authorities had failed to demonstrate any subversive activity attributable to him warranting preventive detention.
Justice Moksha Khajuria Kazmi, while deciding a habeas corpus petition filed through Wani’s paternal uncle, also found that the detention record contained material indicating non-application of mind by the detaining authority.
The case, Shafat Maqbool Wani through his paternal uncle versus Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir and others, arose from detention order No. 27-DMK/PSA of 2025 dated September 13, 2025, passed by the District Magistrate, Kupwara. The order had placed Wani under preventive detention on the ground that his activities were allegedly prejudicial to the security of the State.
The authorities had relied, among other grounds, on allegations concerning Wani’s alleged involvement in FIR No. 69/2025 registered at Police Station Handwara under Sections 13, 17 and 18 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act and Sections 7 and 25 of the Arms Act.
The detention material also referred to literature recovered from Wani’s residence, including books titled “Construction of an Islamic Order in Hindutva Reimagination” and “The Saffronisation of Occupied Kashmir: Demystifying Hindutva Settlers, Colonial Designers.” The authorities had described the literature as anti-national
The High Court, however, noted that the books had been wrongly attributed to Wani as their author. The Court further held that mere possession of books having what it described as “dispiriting titles”, particularly where they were authored by someone else, could not by itself establish criminal or subversive activity warranting preventive detention.
The Court also examined the detention authority’s reference to Wani’s family background. The grounds stated that Wani had allegedly been brought up in a family having separatist ideology and that such feelings had been inculcated in him because his father was an alleged former militant who had surrendered in 1990.
The High Court rejected the basis of treating the father’s past as prejudicial activity attributable to Wani, with the Court describing such an assumption as a delusory basis for preventive detention.
Another issue before the Court concerned the FIR relied upon by the authorities. The detention record referred to the fact that Wani had been granted bail. The High Court held that the detaining authority could not merely rely on the criminal case and grant of bail without independently satisfying itself that there was subsequent or continuing prejudicial activity warranting preventive detention.
The Court found that the respondents had not demonstrated any specific subversive activity attributable to Wani that compelled the authorities to invoke preventive detention, and consequently quashed the detention order.
The Court directed that Wani be released from preventive custody forthwith, subject to there being no requirement for his detention in any other case.
Wani’s detention had followed an FIR registered in 2025. An NIA FIR available on the agency’s website separately records allegations against Shafat Wani under Sections 13, 17 and 18 of the UAPA, including an allegation that he was involved in anti-national activities and received funds from the proscribed organisation The Resistance Front. These are allegations in the FIR and are distinct from the High Court’s findings on the validity of the preventive detention order.
The High Court judgment therefore concerned the legality of the PSA detention and the material relied upon by the detaining authority; it did not amount to an adjudication acquitting Wani of the allegations contained in the separate criminal case. [KNT]
