Prayagraj: The Allahabad high court on Thursday upheld the preventive detention of three men accused of illegally slaughtering cows in Jalaun on March 30, 2025, the first day of Chaitra Navratri coinciding with Eid.While noting that the timing of the incident had the potential to create inter-community tension and disturb public order, the court dismissed the habeas corpus petitions filed by Hasnen, Saiyyaj Ali and Sikandar challenging their detention under the National Security Act (NSA), 1980. A division bench comprising Justice Chandra Dhari Singh and Justice Devendra Singh-I observed: “The slaughter of bovine animals by the accused on the first day of Navratri, in circumstances where the cow is venerated as sacred by the Hindu community, was not merely a criminal act, it was an act that directly and foreseeably struck at the religious sentiments of a significant section of the community at a moment of heightened communal sensitivity.” The high court upheld the detention orders passed by the district magistrate, Jalaun, holding that the procedural safeguards under the NSA were duly complied with. An FIR was lodged on March 31, 2025, at Kotwali Kalpi police station under sections 3/5/8 of the UP prevention of cow slaughter Act, 1955, section 11 of the prevention of cruelty to animals Act, 1960 and sections 4/25 of the Arms Act, 1959 against eight persons, including the petitioners. According to the prosecution, police received information on March 30 about 7-8 persons engaging in illegal cattle slaughter. The police claimed recovery of two to three quintals of beef, knives and other materials. One accused was arrested on the spot while others were named subsequently. The three petitioners were taken into judicial custody between March 31 and April 11. District magistrate invoked section 3(2) of the NSA on April 25 and April 28 directing their preventive detention. The orders were approved by state govt and referred to the UP advisory board under section 10 of the NSA. The detenues appeared before the board on May 28. The board opined that sufficient cause existed for their preventive detention. Thereafter, govt confirmed the detention for a period of 12 months. The petitioners then moved HC arguing that they had been falsely implicated and that the matter, at best, pertained to “law and order” and not “public order.” They contended that the detention orders were passed without proper application of mind and violated Articles 14 (right to equality) and 19 (right to freedom and speech and expression) of the Constitution. It was also submitted that they had no prior criminal history. The high court held that preventive detention is preventive and not punitive in nature, and that courts do not sit in appeal over the subjective satisfaction of the detaining authority. Finding that the procedural requirements under the NSA had been complied with and that the detention orders were based on relevant material, court declined to interfere in exercise of its habeas jurisdiction.
