Supreme Court Cancels Sambhal Violence Accused's Detention Under NSA, Fines UP

On Tuesday, the Supreme Court declared that an extra-judicial confession alone is insufficient to justify preventive detention under the National Security Act (NSA). The court overturned the detention of Mulla Afroz in the Sambhal violence case and imposed a fine of Rs 10 lakh on the Uttar Pradesh government. A bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and Sheel Nagu allowed Afroz's appeal, stating that while an extra-judicial confession can serve as relevant material, the detaining authority must also consider other pertinent circumstances before concluding that preventive detention is justified.

The court found that the authorities in Afroz's case had failed to consider these additional factors and had thus improperly exercised the power of preventive detention. The incident involves Afroz's detention under Section 3(2) of the NSA in relation to the Sambhal violence that erupted in November 2024 during a court-ordered inspection of the Shahi Jama Masjid.

Afroz was arrested by Sambhal police on January 17, 2025, in connection with the violence-related cases. The District Magistrate subsequently issued an NSA detention order against him on October 13, 2025, which was later confirmed by the State Government. Afroz contested the detention in the Allahabad High Court, arguing that the evidence relied upon by the authorities was inadequate and that the case against him primarily rested on an alleged extra-judicial confession.

The State Government disagreed with the plea and relied on the evidence collected during the investigation, alleging that Afroz instigated the crowd during the violence and that his actions posed a risk to public order. The Allahabad High Court supported the detention, noting that the detaining authority had taken into account the material presented to it and that the documents supporting the detention were provided to Afroz.

The High Court emphasized that when reviewing a preventive detention order, the court must assess whether the detaining authority had genuinely considered the relevant material, rather than merely appealing the sufficiency of that evidence. However, the Supreme Court disagreed with the Allahabad High Court's decision. The court examined whether an extra-judicial confession could serve as the basis for a preventive detention order and whether the evidence presented by the detaining authority was legally sufficient.