NAZIR AHMAD DAR vs UNION TERRITORY OF J AND K AND ORS. (HOME)

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT SRINAGAR


Pronounced on : 29.06.2026

HCP No. 329/2025


Nazir Ahmad Dar

…..Petitioner

Through: Mr. Shariq J. Reyaz, Advocate

Vs

UT of J&K and others


.…. Respondents
Through: Mr. Mohsin Qadri, Sr. AAG with
Ms. Maha Majeed, Assisting Counsel.

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. Invoking article 226 of the Constitution of India, the
petitioner Nazir Ahmad Dar, acting through his wife –
Hafeeza Dar, came forward with the present writ petition filed
on 11.11.2025 thereby seeking a writ of habeas corpus for
release of the petitioner from his preventive detention custody
in District Jail, Udhampur on account of preventive detention
order passed by the respondent No. 2- District Magistrate
Srinagar acting under the J&K Public Safety Act, 1978.
1 5
HCP No. 329/2025 Page of

04. The respondent No.2 – District Magistrate, Srinagar
in exercise of power under section 8 of the Jammu &
Kashmir Public Safety Act, 1978 reckoned the alleged
reported activities of the petitioner being prejudicial to the
maintenance of Public Order and, therefore, directed his
preventive detention by issuance of an order No.
DMS/PSA/44/2025 28.10.2025
dated which resulted in
consequent arrest and detention of the petitioner coming into
being on 30.10.2025 .

05. A case for preventive detention of the petitioner was
submitted by the Sr. Superintendent of Police (SSP), Srinagar
No. LGL/Det-PSA/2025/27652-55
in terms of his letter
dated 29.08.2025 thereby purportedly reporting the alleged
state of activities of the petitioner reckoned by the District
Police Srinagar to be prejudicial to the maintenance of Public
Order.

06.
In response to said dossier so submitted by the Sr.
Superintendent of Police (SSP), Srinagar , the respondent No.
2 – District Magistrate, Srinagar acted at his leisure in
considering the same before coming up with issuance of
detention order No. DMS/PSA/44 of 2025 dated
28.10.2025 , almost after a gap of two months.
2 5
HCP No. 329/2025 Page of

07. In the grounds of detention, the alleged antecedents
of the petitioner by reference to his involvement in criminal
cases in FIR No. 371 of 2008 of the Police Station, Budgam,
FIR No. 137/2015 of the Police Station Saddar, FIR No. 33
of 2017 of Crime Branch, Srinagar, FIR No. 97 of 2021 of
the Police Station Pantha Chowk, FIR No. 16 of 2023 of
FIR No. 43 of 2025
Police Station Safar and of Police Station
Pantha Chowk came to be highlighted.

08. The petitioner came up with a challenge to his
preventive detention on the grounds as set out in para 7(A)(i)
to (xi).

09.
The highlight challenge is that the alleged activities
of the petitioner at best are on the side of law and order
problem for which the petitioner is undergoing the routine
ordeal of criminal law whereas the preventive detention
slapped upon him is a punitive punishment being handed
over by the District Police and the District Magistrate,
Srinagar.

10. Upon considering all facts and circumstances, this
Court is constrained to observe that if the alleged reported
state of activities of the petitioner were so serious as posing
risk to the maintenance of Public Order, then the respondent
3 5
HCP No. 329/2025 Page of

No. 2 – District Magistrate, Srinagar ought not have to let the
petitioner enjoy his personal liberty for another two months’
period to perpetuate his alleged prejudicial activities
bothering Public Order.

11.
The respondent No. 2 – District Magistrate,
Srinagar was, thus, obviously expected to act with
promptness to respond to the dossier whereas the dossier
was taken as a matter of routine and that is how the two
months’ time lag is separating the dossier and the issuance
of the detention order without any reason being cited by the
respondent No. 2 – District Magistrate, Srinagar in his order
of detention as well grounds of detention in support thereof
which render the exercise of jurisdiction on his part under
the J&K Public Safety Act, 1978 seriously flawed and
frivolous.

12. In view of the aforesaid, this Court holds detention
No. DMS/PSA/44/2025 28.10.2025
order dated passed by
the respondent No. 2 – District Magistrate, Srinagar read
with approval/confirmation/extension order passed by the
respondent No. 1 as illegal, and are, accordingly, quashed.

13. The petitioner is directed to be restored to his
personal liberty by his release from the concerned Jail
4 5
HCP No. 329/2025 Page of

wherever he is kept detained for which purpose the
Superintendent of the concerned Jail to release the petitioner
forthwith.

14.
Disposed of.

15. Original detention record if produced, to be
returned.

(RAHUL BHARTI)
JUDGE
SRINAGAR
29.06.2026
Opinder

Whether the judgment is speaking : Yes / No

Whether the judgment is reportable : Yes / No
5 5
HCP No. 329/2025 Page of