A Significant Procedural Milestone in Jammu & Kashmir’s Continuing Counter-Terrorism Efforts
Advocate Syed Shabir Bukhari
In a constitutional democracy, questions of national security are addressed not only through investigative and security mechanisms but also through the enduring strength of the rule of law. Every investigation eventually enters the judicial domain, where courts are called upon to examine whether statutory requirements have been fulfilled before permitting further legal action. This delicate balance between protecting public order and safeguarding individual rights lies at the heart of India’s constitutional jurisprudence, reflecting the principle that even the most sensitive investigations must proceed under the watchful supervision of an independent judiciary and in accordance with due process of law.
Every investigation involving national security ultimately reaches a stage where the judiciary becomes the guardian of legal procedure, ensuring that investigative actions are subjected to judicial scrutiny and carried out strictly in accordance with law.
A recent order passed by the Court of the Additional Sessions Judge, TADA/POTA, designated as the Special Judge under the National Investigation Agency (NIA) Act at Srinagar, offers a compelling illustration of this legal process in action.
On 30 June 2026, the Special Court passed a detailed order in FIR No. 03/2023, registered by the Counter Intelligence Kashmir (CIK), directing the issuance of a proclamation against Sheikh Sajad @ Gul, widely reported to be associated with The Resistance Front (TRF), along with six other accused persons. The order followed an application moved by the investigating agency seeking the issuance of proclamation notices after earlier arrest warrants allegedly remained unexecuted.
While the development has attracted considerable public attention because of the identities of the accused and the serious nature of the allegations, it is important to appreciate the legal significance of the order. The Court has not adjudicated upon the guilt or innocence of any accused person. Rather, the order represents an important procedural step within the criminal justice system, intended to secure the presence of persons against whom warrants of arrest could not be executed.
The Genesis of the Investigation
According to the Court’s order, the case traces its origin to 7 June 2023, when the Counter Intelligence Kashmir registered FIR No. 03/2023 under Sections 505 and 153-A of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 13 and 18 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967.
The investigating agency stated that it had received credible information alleging that certain individuals, acting individually as well as through associations connected with print media, electronic media, social media platforms and certain organisations, were allegedly engaged in disseminating false and distorted narratives relating to events in Jammu and Kashmir. According to the prosecution, these activities were allegedly intended to spread disaffection, hatred and enmity against the Indian State and were suspected of being linked to proscribed terrorist organisations.
These assertions formed the foundation of the investigation undertaken by the Counter Intelligence Kashmir.
Serious Allegations Placed Before the Court
During the hearing of the application, the investigating agency placed several allegations before the Special Court.
According to the prosecution, the accused persons had allegedly crossed into Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir, where they were stated to have received illegal training in arms and ammunition. The agency further alleged that they subsequently functioned as active handlers of proscribed terrorist organisations, coordinated terrorist-related activities and participated in the recruitment and radicalisation of youth from Jammu and Kashmir.
The prosecution also informed the Court that the accused persons had remained outside the territorial jurisdiction of Jammu and Kashmir for a prolonged period, making their arrest impossible despite sustained efforts by the investigating agency.
It is essential to emphasise that these allegations are those advanced by the investigating agency before the Court and remain subject to judicial determination during the course of criminal proceedings.
Why the Investigating Agency Approached the Court
The application before the Court was not for conviction, punishment or declaration of guilt. Instead, it sought the issuance of a proclamation, a procedural mechanism available under criminal law when a person against whom a warrant of arrest has already been issued is alleged to have absconded or concealed himself in order to evade arrest.
The investigating agency informed the Court that arrest warrants had earlier been issued by both the Special Court and the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Srinagar. Despite repeated search operations conducted by officers of Counter Intelligence Kashmir and the concerned Station House Officers, the warrants allegedly remained unexecuted.
The prosecution asserted that reports collected during these efforts indicated that the accused persons were intentionally avoiding the process of law while remaining outside the jurisdiction of the investigating authorities.
Judicial Scrutiny Before Issuing Proclamation
One of the most significant aspects of the order is the Court’s careful examination of the statutory requirements governing proclamation proceedings.
The Court observed that the power to issue a proclamation is not automatic. Before exercising such authority, the law requires satisfaction of two essential conditions.
First, a valid warrant of arrest must already have been issued against the accused.
Secondly, the Court must be satisfied, on the basis of material available on record, that the accused has absconded or is deliberately concealing himself so that the warrant cannot be executed.
After hearing the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, examining the investigation records, annexures, search reports and other supporting material, the Court concluded that these statutory requirements stood fulfilled in the present case.
The Court’s Reasoning
The order records that arrest warrants had already been issued against each of the accused persons but remained unexecuted despite repeated attempts by the investigating agency.
The Court further observed that the reports placed on record indicated that the accused persons were allegedly keeping themselves outside the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir, had failed to return despite being aware of the proceedings and had not surrendered before either the investigating agency or the Court.
Considering these circumstances, the Court expressed satisfaction that there existed sufficient material to believe that the accused persons had absconded or were concealing themselves with the intention of evading execution of the warrants issued against them.
Accordingly, the application filed by the investigating agency was allowed.
Who Are the Persons Named in the Proclamation?
The proclamation has been directed against seven accused persons:
Sheikh Sajad @ Gul
Mukhtar Ahmad Baba
Umer Jan Sheikh @ Khalid Zia
Mohammad Altaf Shigan
Mohammad Altaf Bhat
Tehseen Ahmad Rather
Bilal Ahmad Sofi
Each of them has been directed to appear before the Special Court within the time prescribed in the proclamation.
Publication of the Proclamation
The Court also issued detailed directions regarding publication of the proclamation in accordance with law.
The proclamation is to be publicly read at conspicuous places, affixed at the ordinary places of residence of the accused, displayed at the Court premises and published in a newspaper having circulation in the concerned locality. The investigating agency has further been directed to submit a compliance report after completing the publication process.
Such procedural safeguards are intended to ensure that adequate notice is provided before any further legal consequences arise.
Understanding the Larger Legal Significance
The order demonstrates the central role played by courts in balancing national security concerns with procedural fairness.
Counter-terrorism investigations often involve allegations of cross-border activities, underground networks and accused persons remaining beyond the reach of investigating agencies. Even in such cases, the criminal justice system requires investigating agencies to satisfy the Court that every statutory safeguard has been complied with before coercive legal measures are permitted.
The proclamation process thus represents a judicially supervised mechanism designed to compel the appearance of an accused while ensuring adherence to due process.
The order dated 30 June 2026 is a significant procedural milestone in one of the important investigations being conducted by the Counter Intelligence Kashmir. Although it authorises proclamation proceedings against Sheikh Sajad @ Gul and six other accused persons, it does not constitute a finding of guilt or a conviction. The allegations contained in the investigation remain to be established through evidence before the competent court, where the accused will be entitled to all protections guaranteed under law.
At the same time, the order reflects the functioning of the criminal justice system in matters involving national security—where investigative assertions are subjected to judicial examination, statutory safeguards are applied, and every procedural step is taken under the supervision of the Court. It is a reminder that the rule of law remains the cornerstone of India’s response to complex security challenges, ensuring that even the most sensitive investigations proceed within the constitutional framework of fairness, legality and judicial oversight.
(The author is a practising lawyer at J&K and Ladakh High Court)
