An appeal filed to quash a preventive detention order was dismissed as infructuous because the periodic of detention had already expired.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Sr. No. 70 HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU
LPA No. 57/2026
Shokat Ali
…. Petitioner/Appellant(s)
Through:Mr. Siddhant Abrol, Advocate
V/s
Union Territory of J&K & Ors. …..Respondent(s)
Through:Ms. Priyanka Bhat, Advocate vice Mrs. Monika Kohli, Sr.AAG
CORAM : HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE SINDHU SHARMA, JUDGE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SHAHZAD AZEEM, JUDGE
ORDER
01.09.2026
01. This Letters Patent Appeal has been preferred against the judgment dated 05.03.2026 passed by the learned Single Judge in HCP No. 111/2025, titled Shokat Ali v. Union Territory of J&K & Ors. , whereby the writ petition challenging the preventive detention order No. PSA/168 of 2025 dated 25.06.2025 passed by the District Magistrate Kathua, against the appellant, came to be dismissed.
02. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the period of detention has already expired, therefore, this LPA has become infructuous.
03. In view of the aforesaid submission, the present Letters Patent Appeal is disposed of as having been rendered infructuous.
(SHAHZAD AZEEM) (SINDHU SHARMA) Judge Judge
JAMMU Amit
01.09.2026
Shokat Ali
Union Territory of J&K & Ors.
SINDHU SHARMA
SHAHZAD AZAEM
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
