Skip to content
Ravington
Back to feed
World

High Court: Childhood Crimes Cannot Be a Ground for Preventive Detention in Adulthood

LiveLaw

Key Points

  • The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir ruled that actions committed in childhood cannot be a ground for preventive detention in adulthood.
  • The individual named Zahid Ahmad Mir was legally a child as he was under the age of 18 during the period of the alleged crime.
  • The Court revealed that there was no evidence indicating that the individual engaged in any new criminal activity after being released on bail.
  • The detention order was quashed, and it was ruled that the detainee should be released immediately if there are no other cases against them.

By the Numbers

15 October 2006 date of birthAugust 2022 bail dateSection 307 of the IPC (Indian Penal Code)

The High Court of Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh ruled that the alleged actions committed by a person before reaching the age of majority cannot be used as a justification for taking them into preventive detention under the Public Safety Act (PSA) after they reach adulthood. Emphasizing that the primary purpose of the juvenile justice system is rehabilitation, the Court decided that a criminal act cannot permanently stigmatize a child and cannot be turned into a ground for detention in later years.

The decision was given following an objection by Zahir Ahmad Mir to the detention order issued by the Shopian District Magistrate. An FIR (First Information Report) had been registered against Mir regarding a plan to attack non-local workers directed by a Pakistan-based handler, during which a weapon was accidentally fired, resulting in the injury of a person. At the time of his arrest, Mir was a child under the age of 18 and had been released on bail by the Juvenile Justice Board.

The Court stated that following his release on bail, there was no evidence or information in the records indicating that Mir had engaged in any new criminal activity. Justice Sanjay Dhar quashed the detention order and ordered the immediate release of the detainee, emphasizing that actions committed during childhood should not haunt a person through preventive detention once they step into adulthood.

React to this story

Next storyTrump Could Save November Elections: Economy and Iran War Crisis

Ask about this story

Answers are AI-generated from this story only.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the core legal determination of the High Court in this decision?
The Court ruled that alleged crimes committed by a person while under the age of 18 (as a child) cannot form a basis for taking that person into preventive detention under the Public Safety Act when they become an adult.
What charges were brought against the detainee Zahid Ahmad Mir?
Mir was taken into detention citing an FIR (First Information Report) related to charges such as a plan to target workers, illegal activities, and the accidental discharge of a weapon resulting in the injury of a person.
On what grounds did the Court quash the detention order?
The Court quashed the detention order on the grounds that the individual was a minor during the time the crimes were committed and it was established that he did not engage in any new criminal activity after being released on bail by the Juvenile Justice Board.

This is an AI-generated summary. The full story lives at the source.

Read the full story at the sourcelivelaw.inHow we produce our content

This story across sources · 1

Related stories