The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court dismissed the appeal of Shaista Maqbool alias ‘Choti Behan’, upholding her detention under the Public Safety Act (PSA) for her alleged links with the banned terror group Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) and its slain commander Musaib Lakhvi.
According to authorities, Shaista, a resident of Bandipora, was in close contact with the active LeT commander between 2016 and 2018, and their relationship is often described as a “love affair” in local circles. Security services say that after Lakhvi’s death, she made contact with Pakistani handlers Abu Zehran and Abu Hans through encrypted communication channels.
Investigators alleged that Shaista used several aliases in terror networks, including ‘Choti Behan’ and ‘Choti’, and used a Facebook account under the identity ‘Lakhvi Musaib’ to communicate with terrorists across the Line of Control (LoC). She allegedly provided logistical and intelligence support to LeT operatives in North Kashmir, including sensitive information on the movements of political leaders and persons under protection.
Add Zee News as your preferred source
A High Court bench comprising Chief Justice Arun Pali and Justice Rajnesh Oswal rejected her appeal, noting that her detention was based on “specific, vague grounds”. The court ruled that ordinary criminal law was insufficient to counter her “clandestine and anti-national activities”, thereby upholding the use of preventive detention.
Citing Supreme Court precedents, the bench ruled that judicial review cannot override the “subjective satisfaction” of the detaining authority when the order was not properly reviewed, which the court found absent in this case.
The judges upheld due process, noting that Shaista received all 30 pages of detention materials, was heard in person by the Advisory Board, and that her submissions were properly considered and dismissed.
Authorities also alleged that Shaista received direct instructions from handlers across the border to aid terrorist activities, including facilitating operations and assisting in targeted killings.
The court concluded that there was a “live and direct connection” between her actions and the grounds for her detention, making her continued detention under the Public Safety Act legally justified.
