The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court recently quashed a detention order against 22-year-old Shahbaz Ahmad Palla, who was held under the Jammu and Kashmir Public Safety Act, 1978. The HC said that someone who steadfastly pursues or follows the basics of an Abrahamic faith is undoubtedly a fundamentalist but there is no negativity associated with it and it is distinct from an extremist or a separatist.
While setting aside the order of detention dated April 8, 2022, the bench of Justice Atul Sreesharan pointed out that the allegations against Shahbaz do not necessarily make out a case of him having an extremist or separatist ideology.
“The usage of the phrase ‘fundamentalist ideology’ by the District Magistrate, does not necessarily mean that the detenue possesses an extremist or separatist ideology. The Oxford ‘Fundamentalist ideology’ is part and parcel of the Abrahamic faith where the adherents have to necessarily believe in certain fundamentals of the religion to be accepted as the adherents of that religion,” the bench stated.
The accused, Shahbaz, was alleged to be an active member of terrorist organisation TRF (The Resistance Front), helping it in its subversive activities in and around Pulwama district. It was also alleged that he was motivating the youth to indulge in subversive activities in Pulwama and was a “hard core fundamentalist” who voluntarily agreed to work as an overground worker (OGW) of the TRF, which is alleged to be an affiliate of the erstwhile of Lashkar- e-Taiba (LeT).
The order further notes that a “fundamentalist Muslim” is merely someone who believes in the fundamentals of Islam.
“…it is relevant to mention that the dictionary defines fundamentalism as ‘the strict maintenance of traditional orthodox religious beliefs of doctrines; ESP belief in the inerrancy of scripture and literal acceptance of the creeds as fundamentals of protestant Christianity’. It cannot have a negative bearing on his personality. The same is as a fundamentalist Muslim cannot be equated with an extremist or a separatist. Therefore, the said ground also is vague and has been used lucidly without proper understanding,” the bench observed.
Another reason base on which the court quashed the detention order was that Shahbaz, who was named in a separate FIR as another accused (Suhail), was nowhere linked to the allegations against the other accused and neither did the witnesses name him.
The counsel for the union territory vehemently opposed the plea seeking to quash the detention order. Rais-u-din Ganie, the deputy AG, pointed out the grounds made out by the district magistrate supporting Shahbaz’s detention. While the accused had said that the grounds for his detention were never communicated to him, the UT’s counsel stated otherwise, adding that the execution report by the lower court was duly signed by the accused. Though the court accepted the deputy AG’s contention, the detenue was set free.
Shahbaz was held at Kot Bhalwal Jail in Jammu since April 14, 2022, after he was apprehended upon the execution of a detention order dated April 8.
Comments
0 comment