27-year-old FIRs cannot sustain preventive detention: DB quashes PSA order

08/10/2026

JAMMU, Oct 7: The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has quashed the preventive detention of Abdul Qayoom alias Bittu of Kadwah, Udhampur, holding that FIRs dating back nearly 27 years could not, by themselves, establish the required "live and proximate link" for preventive detention.
A Division Bench comprising Justice Sindhu Sharma and Justice Rajesh Sekhri allowed Qayoom's intra-court appeal and set aside the October 9, 2025 judgment of the Single Judge, which had dismissed his habeas corpus petition. The Division Bench pronounced its judgment on October 6.
The detention order, No. 14-PSA-2024, was passed by the District Magistrate, Udhampur, on December 24, 2024 under Section 8 of the preventive detention law on the basis of a dossier and other material submitted by the Senior Superintendent of Police, Udhampur.
Qayoom had challenged the detention, pointing out that four FIRs relied upon by the authorities related to 1997 and 1998, while the detention order was passed almost 27 years later. He also submitted that he had already been acquitted in all four cases.
The Division Bench observed that although past conduct may be relevant in preventive detention matters, there must be a live and proximate connection between the alleged prejudicial activities and the necessity for detention. A substantial passage of time assumes significance as the causal link may otherwise stand snapped, it said.
The court noted a gap of about 26 years between the incidents forming the basis of the old FIRs and the detention order. It also examined recent material relied upon by the authorities, including a Daily Diary Report dated November 3, 2024, reports of the Chowkidar and Numbardar and proceedings under Section 126 of the BNSS.
However, the Bench found that the material, when considered as a whole, did not satisfactorily establish a continuing and proximate connection between the alleged conduct and the necessity for preventive detention in December 2024.
The court held that mere reference to antecedents separated from the detention order by about 27 years could not, by itself, furnish the requisite live link. The Detaining Authority was required to demonstrate why such old incidents continued to have a proximate bearing on the necessity for detention, it said.
The Bench also found a separate constitutional infirmity in the manner in which Qayoom's representation against the detention was dealt with. The representation was received by the authorities on January 28, 2025 but was decided only on June 19, 2025, nearly five months later.
The court noted that no satisfactory explanation had been furnished for the delay and held that unexplained delay in considering the representation infringed the constitutional safeguard guaranteed under Article 22(5).
The Bench observed that the requirement of expeditious consideration of a detenue's representation cannot be treated as a mere formality.
Consequently, the High Court set aside the Single Judge's judgment and quashed the detention order against Abdul Qayoom. The authorities were directed to release him forthwith, provided he was not required in connection with any other case.

Photo Gallery

BSE Sensex

NSE Nifty