Jammu & Kashmir High Court – Srinagar Bench
Zaid Rafiq Rather vs Union Territory Of Jammu & Kashmir And … on 1 April, 2026
Author: Rahul Bharti
Bench: Rahul Bharti
2026:JKLHC-SGR:85
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT SRINAGAR
Reserved on : 06.03.2026.
Pronounced on : 01.04.2026.
HCP No. 313/2025
Zaid Rafiq Rather, Age 20 years
S/o Mohammad Rafeeq Rather
R/o Zaffron Colny Ichnambal
Through his father Mohammad Rafeeq Rather
.....Petitioner
Through: Ms. Nida Nazir, Advocate
Vs
1. Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh
through Commissioner/Secretary Home, Civil Secretariat,
Srinagar/ Jammu.
2. District Magistrate, Srinagar.
3. Superintendent, District Jail Poonch.
..... Respondents
Through: Ms. Maha Majeed, Assisting Counsel vice
Mr. Mohsin S. Qadri, Sr. AAG
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAHUL BHARTI, JUDGE
JUDGMENT
01. Heard learned counsel for both sides.
02. Perused the writ record and the documents
therewith.
03. The petitioner – Zaid Rafiq Rather acting through
his father – Mohd. Rafiq Rather came to petition this Court
with institution of the present writ petition on 27.10.2025
through the medium of which he is intending to seek
restoration of his personal liberty lost on account of his
HCP No. 313/2025 Page 1 of 11
2026:JKLHC-SGR:85
preventive detention custody ordered by the respondent No. 2
– District Magistrate, Srinagar under the Jammu & Kashmir
Public Safety Act, 1978.
04. The case for preventive detention of the petitioner
came to be processed and forwarded from the end of Sr.
Superintendent of Police (SSP), Srinagar when by virtue of a
letter No.LGL/Det/-PSA/2025/26538-41 dated 19.08.2025
the alleged state of activities relatable to the petitioner
reckoned by the District Police, Srinagar being prejudicial to
the security of the State and, thus, seeking his preventive
detention under the Jammu & Kashmir Public Safety Act,
1978.
05. In his five-page dossier, the Sr. Superintendent of
Police (SSP), Srinagar came to address the petitioner as a 12 th
class pass out from Muslim Educational Institute Parimpora
and pursuing his B. Com. in Islamia College, Srinagar. The
petitioner is referred to be deeply influenced by radical
ideology coming in contact with active terrorists and OGW’s
who motivated him to work with them as OGW of LeT/TRF
outfit for providing logistic, financial and operational support
etc to the terrorists of LeT/TRF, on the basis of which
motivation the petitioner started to provide all logistic
support and shelter to many terrorists and also sharing all
HCP No. 313/2025 Page 2 of 11
2026:JKLHC-SGR:85
sensitive information regarding movement of police and
security forces in the area of Qamarwari and its adjacent
area, thus, becoming a staunch OGW of Zaffron Colony,
Ichanambal area Srinagar and its adjacent areas.
06. The dossier further refers to FIR No. 127/2022
under sections 13/18/20/38 & 39 Unlawful Activities
(Prevention) Act and section 7/25 IA Act registered by the
Police Station Parimpora in which the petitioner is said to
have been arrested for alleged commission of offence relatable
to an incident of 28.05.2022 related to uploading posts on
social media and doing propaganda to threaten minority and
non-local employees, mostly Kashmiri Pandits, police
personnels and others.
07. A dossier refers to the names of Basit Ahmad Dar,
Mohd. Lateef Rather, Moomin Gulzar, Saqib Ahmad and Adil
Ahmad Parray being the conspirators in organizing the
alleged activities booked under FIR No. 127/2022. The
dossier refers that the petitioner stands bailed out in said FIR
whereupon he has been counseled to restrain himself from
such activities but to of no avail. Beat-book reports of
23.06.2025, 08.07.2025 & 25.07.2025 are said to have
diarized and documented the petitioner’s involvement in anti-
national activities in discreet manner on the basis of which
HCP No. 313/2025 Page 3 of 11
2026:JKLHC-SGR:85
the District Police was led to reckon that if the petitioner is
given liberty to move freely he may indulge in unlawful/anti-
national activities and that the normal law is inadequate
against the petitioner to deter him from unlawful/anti-
national activities and, therefore, warrant his detention
under the J&K Public Safety Act, 1978.
08. In the final part of dossier issuance of detention
warrant under the J&K Public Safety Act, 1978 has been
solicited to prevent her from acting in any manner prejudicial
to the security of the State.
09. The very fact that the dossier is referable to the
petitioner who is a man but being addressed by reference to
pronoun “her” is a pointer to the fact that writing of the
dossier hardly underwent any correction or final reading at
the end of the Sr. Superintendent of Police (SSP), District
Srinagar.
10. Literally read then, the preventive detention of a
woman has been solicited by the Sr. Superintendent of Police
(SSP), District Srinagar from the respondent No. 2 – District
Magistrate, Srinagar.
11. Acting upon said dossier, the respondent No. 2 –
District Magistrate, Srinagar purportedly framed the grounds
HCP No. 313/2025 Page 4 of 11
2026:JKLHC-SGR:85
of detention by literally borrowing the dossier text without
any shade of tone and tenor difference and on that basis
purportedly drawing a subjective satisfaction to subject the
petitioner to suffer preventive detention so as to put an end
to the alleged activities of the petitioner reckoned being
prejudicial to the security of the State.
12. By virtue of a communication No.
DMS/PSA/Jud/231-234/2025 dated 12.09.2025
addressed to the petitioner, the respondent No. 2 – District
Magistrate, Srinagar meant to apprise the petitioner about
passing of detention order against him and his right to make
a representation against the detention to the Govt., Home
Department and also the detaining authority i.e. the District
Magistrate, Srinagar.
13. The respondent No. 2 – District Magistrate,
Srinagar, thus, came forward with issuance of preventive
detention Order No. DMS/PSA/38/2025 dated 12.09.2025,
i.e., after a gap of almost 22 days thereby ordering the
preventive detention of the petitioner to be kept in District
Jail, Udhampur so as to prevent the petitioner from acting in
a manner prejudicial to the security of the State.
14. On the basis of said detention order, the petitioner
had come to be taken into custody on 14.09.2025 and
HCP No. 313/2025 Page 5 of 11
2026:JKLHC-SGR:85
delivered to the Superintendent, District Jail Udhampur for
confinement in connection with which it is stated that all
procedural compliances came to be carried out. The
execution of the detention warrant had taken place through
PSI Harsh Sharma, PID No. 245990/GEC, P/s
Panthachowk Srinagar who is said to have handed over to
the petitioner a compilation of 51 leaves besides explaining
the contents of grounds by reading over in English and
explaining in Urdu/Kashmiri language enabling the
petitioner to understand it fully. The petitioner is said to
have been apprised of his right to make a representation
to the Govt. against the detention order if so desired by
him.
15. In his execution report, said Executing Officer – PSI
Harsh Sharma, P/s Panthachowk Srinagar is on record to
state that he apprised the petitioner about the report to make
a representation to Govt.
16. Thus, both in the execution report and receipt of
grounds of detention, the fact is found missing a mention
that the petitioner was apprised of his corresponding right to
make a representation against his detention to the detention
order making authority which being the respondent No. 2 –
District Magistrate, Srinagar
HCP No. 313/2025 Page 6 of 11
2026:JKLHC-SGR:85
17. Counter affidavit to the writ petition came to be
filed from the end of the respondent No. 2 – District
Magistrate, Srinagar on 18.12.2025 wherein justifying the
preventive detention of the petitioner on the strength of the
grounds of detention and the dossier.
18. In his writ petition, the petitioner has assailed his
detention on number of grounds by saying that the copies of
beat-book reports dated 23.06.2025, 08.07.2025 &
25.07.2025 were never provided to him for enabling him to
make a representation.
19. Although the petitioner in his writ petition has not
referred any fact of having made any representation against
his preventive detention but in the counter affidavit it has
come to be stated by the respondent No. 2 – District
Magistrate, Srinagar that vide communication dated
14.10.2025 representation submitted was considered and
found by the Govt. to be without any merit and rejected vide
communication dated 14.10.2025 about which the family/
relatives of the petitioner stood communicated as to fact of
rejection of the petitioner’s representation.
20. By virtue of Govt. Order No. Home/PB-V/1724 of
2025 dated 17.09.2025, detention Order No. DMS/PSA/
38/2025 dated 12.09.2025 came to be approved and the
HCP No. 313/2025 Page 7 of 11
2026:JKLHC-SGR:85
case forwarded for opinion of the Advisory Board which came
to be tendered vide opinion report dated 08.10.2025 holding
the preventive detention of the petitioner to be resting on
justifiable grounds which paved the way for the issuance of
Govt. Order No. Home/PB-V/1876 of 2025 dated
14.10.2025 thereby ordering preventive detention of the
petitioner to last for a period of six months at first instance
with effect from 14.09.2025 till 13.03.2026 and place of
confinement to be District Jail, Udhampur.
21. The petitioner, from his end, had made
representation only to the Advisory Board wherein he came to
state that being a student he had nothing to do with the
alleged activities attributed to him and the the report
submitted by the Police Department was baseless and,
therefore, solicited a personal hearing.
22. The Advisory Board in its Opinion Report has
stated that it came to accord personal hearing to the
petitioner and also considered his representation but still felt
not convinced to opine that the preventive detention of the
petitioner was unjustified.
23. The petitioner is said to have been produced before
said Advisory Board through virtual mode on 08.10.2025 as
is confirmed by the Superintendent District Jail, Udhampur
HCP No. 313/2025 Page 8 of 11
2026:JKLHC-SGR:85
in his communication No. DJU/DS/25/12071-72 dated
08.10.2025 addressed to the Additional Secretary to Govt.,
Home Department, Govt. of Jammu & Kashmir.
24. The Home Department, Govt. of Jammu & Kashmir
acting through its Additional Secretary to Govt., by virtue of a
communication No. Home/PB-V/498/2025/7683149 dated
14.10.2025 addressed to the Respondent No. 2 – District
Magistrate, Srinagar apprised the fact of consideration of the
petitioner’s representation being found to be without merit.
The petitioner is said to have been apprised on 15.10.2025
about the fact of disposal of his representation as
acknowledged by his signature.
25. Interestingly, the Advisory Board in its opinion
dated 08.10.2025 has come forward with a recital in para 2
that the petitioner as a detenue stood informed of his right to
make a representation against his detention to the detaining
authority as well as to the Govt.
26. This recital of the Advisory Board in its opinion
report is counter to the execution report tendered by PSI
Harish Sharma while taking the petitioner into detention and
delivering him with 51 leaves compilation of detention order
and the documents therewith but only apprising the
petitioner about his right to make a representation to the
HCP No. 313/2025 Page 9 of 11
2026:JKLHC-SGR:85
Govt. and omitting reference to his right of representation
available at his disposal to the detention order making
authority.
27. So much so, even the Superintendent District Jail,
Udhampur in his communication No. DJU/DS/25/9413-23
dated 14.09.2025 addressed to the Special Secretary to
Govt., Home Department, Govt. of Jammu & Kashmir is on
record stating that the petitioner has been informed about
his right of making a representation against his detention to
the Govt. against his detention order.
28. Thus, at every relevant point of time, the
petitioner’s constitutional right of making a representation
against his detention to the detention order making authority
came to suffer deletion, but wherefrom the Advisory Board
came forward with a reference and recital in its opinion
report dated 08.10.2025 that the petitioner was informed
about his right of making a representation against his
detention to the detaining authority as also to the Govt., is a
musing link on entire detention record.
29. Thus, it is here where this Court finds the
preventive detention of the petitioner seriously flawed and
holds the same illegal.
HCP No. 313/2025 Page 10 of 11
2026:JKLHC-SGR:85
30. Accordingly, preventive detention Order No.
DMS/PSA/38/2025 dated 12.09.2025 read with
approval/confirmation/extension order if any passed at the
end of the Home Department, Govt. of Jammu & Kashmir as
illegal and hereby quashed and the petitioner is directed to
be restored to his personal liberty by his release from the
concerned Jail wherever the petitioner is kept in detention.
The concerned Superintendent Jail is directed to release the
petitioner forthwith.
31. Disposed of.
(RAHUL BHARTI)
JUDGE
SRINAGAR
01.04.2026
“Opinder”
Whether the judgment is speaking : Yes
HCP No. 313/2025 Page 11 of 11
