"Shameless": Jammu and Kashmir High Court quashes preventive detention order passed against wrong man

The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh recently quashed the preventive detention of a man, on finding that he was mistakenly detained only because he shared a name which was similar to that of another individual whom the authorities suspected of involvement in terrorist activities [Imtiyaz Ahmad Ganie vs UT of J&K].

Justice Moksha Khajuria Kazmi also criticised the detaining authority for "shamelessly" trying to defend the mistake, concluding that the detention order clearly reflected a non-application of mind.

The Court held that there was no foundation to justify the detention order issued by the District Magistrate of Anantnag, under the J&K Public Safety Act, 1978, and quashed the same.

"The vitiating fact appearing in the grounds of detention is worth serious notice, as admittedly the detenue is not involved in a criminal case on the basis whereof he has been detained, as it is someone else who has a similar name, who is stated to be involved in the case which founds basis for prevention detention of the detenue. The detaining authority is shamelessly trying support for the issuance of the impugned order from material which does not speak of the involvement of the detenue in a case which has formed basis for issuance of the impugned order, as such the foundation on the basis whereof the detenue has been implicated and detained under preventive detention has collapsed by default," the September 3 ruling said.

The Court was hearing a habeas corpus petition filed by one Imtiyaz Ahmad Ganie, who was placed under preventive detention in April 2024 following an order by the District Magistrate, Anantnag.

The authorities claimed that the decision was tied to a first information report (FIR) that cited offences under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, the Arms Act, and the Explosives Act. This FIR was registered following the arrest of a Jaish-e-Mohammad (JeM) militant, Waseem Ahmad Ganie.

The government argued that the detenue (Ganie) was among the Over-Ground Workers (OGWs) identified during the investigation, and his detention had been necessary to maintain security in the region during the 2024 General Elections.

Ganie, however, denied these allegations and said that the order cited to place him under preventive detention was passed without any application of mind.

The High Court, after examining the detention record, discovered that the FIR cited by the authorities actually pertained to one Imtiyaz Ahmad Wani, and not the petitioner, who shared a similar name, that is, Imtiyaz Ahmad Ganie.

The Court held that such a lapse reflected complete non-application of mind by the detaining authority, rendering the detention order illegal and unsustainable.

The High Court referred to the Supreme Court’s ruling in Ameena Begum v. State of Telangana (2023), which held that detention orders based on non-application of mind cannot survive judicial scrutiny.

It also cited Jai Singh v. State of J&K, where the apex court warned that detention orders passed in a routine manner or copied from police dossiers show a lack of independent satisfaction by the detaining authority and violate rights to personal liberty.

The High Court proceeded to allow Ganie's petition and ordered his immediate release from the Central Jail at Kot Bhalwal, Jammu.

Advocate Sheikh Younis appeared for the petitioner/ detenue (Ganie)

Government Advocate I lyas Nazir appeared for the respondent authorities.

[Read Order]