Offences committed as a juvenile cannot be basis for preventive detention later: Jammu and Kashmir HC

The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh recently observed that acts allegedly committed by a person during his juvenile years cannot later become the basis for preventive detention after he attains majority [Zahid Ahmed Mir v. UT of J&K].

Justice Sanjay Dhar made the observations while quashing a preventive detention order passed against one Zahid Ahmad Mir.

The Court observed that juvenile justice laws prioritise rehabilitation and that an act committed by a child cannot permanently stigmatize his future.

 “An illegal act committed by a juvenile does not stigmatize his future and likewise, an illegal act committed by a juvenile cannot form basis for issuance of a detention order subsequently, more particularly when the juvenile cannot be detained under the Public Safety Act," the July 17 judgment said.

The Court was hearing a habeas corpus petition filed by Mir challenging a preventive detention order issued against him in April 2025.

Mir was among those who were earlier accused of being overground workers who had conspired to target and kill non-local labourers at the direction of a Pakistan-based handler. An FIR was registered in 2022 in the matter, citing the offences under Section 307 (attempt to murder) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), provisions of the Arms Act and Section 20 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA).

At the time, Mir was a juvenile. He was later released on bail on the orders of a Juvenile Justice Board.

In 2025, the District Magistrate at Shopian issued a preventive detention order against him under the Jammu and Kashmir Public Safety Act, 1978.

Mir challenged this detention order. He argued that he was already released on bail in the 2022 case and that there were no other criminal allegations against him.

The authorities referred to the allegations against Mir in the 2022 case to justify the preventive detention.

After considering the rival submissions, the Court allowed Mir's plea. It noted that the detention record did not disclose any subsequent criminal conduct by him following his release on bail in the 2022 case.

The Court concluded that the detention order was founded on stale allegations relating to the detenue's juvenile years and that the authorities had failed to demonstrate any fresh prejudicial activity after his release on bail.

It, therefore, quashed the preventive detention order issued against Mir and ordered his release.

"Without there being any particulars with regard to the alleged activities of the petitioner after having secured bail... and without there being any material on record to support the assertion of the detaining authority in this regard, the impugned order of detention becomes vulnerable," the Court held.

Advocate MA Makroo appeared for Mir.

Deputy Advocate General Bikram Deep Singh appeared for the Jammu and Kashmir authorities.

[Read Order]