A 3-judge bench of the Supreme Court of India comprising of Justices N.V. Ramana, B.R. Gavai and Sanjiv Khanna heard the petitions "Asifa Mubeen v. State of Jammu and Kashmir" and "Enakshi Ganguly v. Union of India" on Monday.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta stated that the detention of Mubeen Shah had been revoked. On the basis of the same, the petition was withdrawn.
Dr. Mubeen Shah, a prominent businessman, has been detained post the scrapping of Article 370 that took place on 5th August. Asifa, his wife, had filed the habeas corpus petition for his release.
Next the Court considered the petition filed by child rights activists Enakshi Ganguly and Shanta Sinha which alleged that juveniles were under illegal detention in Kashmir.
The petitioners submitted that the children detained were as young as 9 years old and required psychological help. Sr. Adv. Huzefa Ahmadi, appearing for the petitioners, remarked that as the report had been compiled under the Juvenile Justice Act, it was a public document and should have been supplied to them.
Justice Ramana acknowledged that he had received the Juvenile Justice Report and that time was required for its appraisal. He stated that it would be taken up on 13th December, after the admission list.
On November 5, the Court had asked the Juvenile Justice Committee to submit a fresh report on the allegations of detention of minors in Kashmir, after addressing all issues independently.
This was after the bench agreed with the submission of the petitioners that the committee had simply forwarded the reports of the J&K police without any independent application of mind.
The Committee did not even notice that preventive detention of juveniles is barred under Code of Criminal Procedure and the J&K Public Safety Act, the petitioners had submitted.
In its report submitted on October 1, the Committee comprising four judges of J&K High Court had stated that 144 children were detained in Kashmir since August 5, following the revocation of special status of the State. Quoting the report of the J&K police, the Committee said that all of them were dealt with in accordance with the procedure under the Juvenile Justice Act and none of them were under unlawful detention.
Disputing the correctness of this report, the petitioners highlighted that the preventive detention of juveniles is barred under law.
On September 20, the CJI-led bench had directed the Committee to report on the allegations raised by the petitioners.
Read the Order Here