Sambhal violence: SC questions UP over NSA detention based on custodial confession
text_fields
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday asked the Uttar Pradesh government whether detention under the National Security Act (NSA) can be ordered on the basis of a confession allegedly made by an accused while in police custody.
The court was hearing a petition challenging the preventive detention of Mulla Afroz, who has been described as the alleged "mastermind" behind the November 2024 Sambhal violence. Afroz was arrested on the basis of a confession he allegedly made while in police custody, Live Law reported.
The National Security Act allows authorities to detain a person without trial for up to a year.
The Sambhal violence broke out on November 24, 2024, after a group of Muslims objected to a survey of the Shahi Jama Masjid in Chandausi town of Sambhal. The survey had been ordered in a suit claiming that the mosque was built in 1526 by Mughal ruler Babar on the site of an ancient Hindu temple.
The violence left five people dead, with locals alleging that four of them were killed in police firing.
Although the Allahabad High Court granted Afroz bail, the Uttar Pradesh government passed an order on October 13, 2025, detaining him under the National Security Act.
Afroz then approached the Supreme Court after the High Court upheld the detention order.
During Tuesday's hearing, the bench questioned the relevance and evidentiary value of the alleged custodial confession.
"Detention order is preventive, not punitive and it cannot be invoked as a mantra to be invoked before the court to defeat every challenge," Live Law quoted the bench as saying. "Therefore, there has to be some material on the basis of which you are subjectively satisfied."
The Uttar Pradesh government defended Afroz's detention, arguing that it was based on the alleged likelihood of his causing violence or affecting public order. The state maintained that where the available material indicates such a likelihood, it would be sufficient to justify preventive detention, Live Law reported.
On the custodial confession, the state argued that its relevance was a matter to be considered during legal proceedings.
The Supreme Court reserved its order on Afroz's plea.
