New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday struck down the preventive detention of Sambhal violence accused Mulla Afroz under the National Security Act (NSA) and directed the Uttar Pradesh government to pay Rs 10 lakh in costs, sharply criticising the state for what it called an unlawful use of a harsh preventive-detention law.
A bench comprising Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Sheel Nagu allowed Afroz’s appeal, set aside the Allahabad High Court order that had sustained his detention, and ruled that an alleged confession made in police custody could not be used as the foundation for action under the National Security Act (NSA), 1980.
“Preventive detention cannot be based on inadmissible custodial confession. Custodial confession can’t be the basis for NSA,” the bench said.
The court held that the Uttar Pradesh authorities had acted beyond the limits of law in detaining Afroz. It imposed Rs 10 lakh costs on the state for the “illegal exercise of draconian power”.
The bench said the alleged confession attributed to Afroz during police custody was inadmissible and, therefore, could not furnish the material needed for the detaining authority to arrive at its subjective satisfaction, as reported by The New Indian Express.
Calling the action “unsustainable in law,” the apex court said an order of preventive detention could not rest solely on such a custodial statement.
High Court Order Set Aside
The Supreme Court’s ruling overturns the Allahabad High Court decision that had declined to interfere with Afroz’s detention under the NSA. The bench had reserved its judgment in the matter on September 8.
Afroz had secured bail from the Allahabad High Court in the criminal case linked to the Sambhal violence. However, the Uttar Pradesh administration invoked the NSA against him on October 13, 2025, leading to his detention again.
He is accused of being the mastermind behind the violence in Sambhal in 2024, which erupted after a court-ordered survey of the Shahi Jama Masjid. Four people were killed during the unrest.
Afroz was arrested 54 days after the violence. The case against him, according to his challenge before the top court, was substantially based on an alleged confession made while he was in custody.
Rival Claims Before Apex Court
In his appeal, Afroz asserted that he was innocent and alleged that the deaths had been caused by police firing. He also claimed that the investigation was biased.
He contended that the NSA had been invoked mechanically, without due application of mind, merely because several cases had been registered against him. His side argued that preventive detention must be supported by live and proximate material indicating a genuine possibility of disruption to public order.
The Uttar Pradesh government opposed the appeal, maintaining that Afroz’s release could lead to fresh communal violence and adversely affect public order. The state submitted that the available material showed a possibility of recurrence.
On the issue of the alleged confession, the state argued that its admissibility was a question to be examined during the criminal trial.
After considering the rival submissions, the Supreme Court disapproved of the state’s action, annulled the detention order and imposed costs on the Uttar Pradesh government.
While delivering the judgment, Justice Datta also remembered his law clerk, who died before reaching the age of 27, and dedicated the verdict to his memory.