The Supreme Court has imposed a cost of Rs 10 lakh on the Uttar Pradesh government while dealing with the preventive detention of Mulla Afroz, an accused in the 2024 Sambhal violence case. The court held that a preventive detention order cannot be based on an alleged confession made by an accused while in police custody.

A bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and Sheel Nagu was hearing Afroz's challenge to his detention under the National Security Act (NSA).

The matter came before the Supreme Court after the Allahabad High Court dismissed his petition challenging the detention.

The Supreme Court had reserved its judgment on September 8 after hearing arguments in the case.

A key issue before the bench was whether an alleged confession made during police custody could legally be relied upon to justify preventive detention under the NSA.

Afroz was detained on October 13, 2025, under Section 3(2) of the National Security Act.

He had been accused in connection with the violence that broke out in Sambhal in November 2024 during a survey of the Shahi Jama Masjid. Four people were killed in the violence.

Afroz challenged his preventive detention, arguing that he was subsequently linked to the violence case based on an alleged confession made while in police custody.

The Uttar Pradesh government had defended the detention before the Allahabad High Court, arguing that the violence had affected law and order and public peace in the area. The state maintained that preventive detention was necessary to prevent Afroz from allegedly engaging in activities that could disturb public order in the future.

The Allahabad High Court dismissed Afroz's petition in June 2026. It held that the detention order had been issued on the basis of the detaining authority's ‘subjective satisfaction’ and the material available on record.

Afroz then approached the Supreme Court through a Special Leave Petition, challenging the High Court's decision and the detention order.

During the Supreme Court proceedings, the bench examined the evidentiary basis of the detention order, particularly the alleged confession recorded while Afroz was in police custody.

The court questioned whether such a confession could form the basis for invoking preventive detention under the NSA.

Preventive detention under the NSA is intended to prevent a person from engaging in activities considered prejudicial to national security, public order or other specified interests.

It is distinct from punitive detention, which follows a criminal conviction or is imposed during the ordinary criminal process.

The case also raises questions about the material that can be relied upon by authorities while passing preventive detention orders.

The Supreme Court's observations focused on whether an alleged confession made in police custody could be treated as sufficient material for such an order.

The respondents in the Supreme Court proceedings include the Uttar Pradesh government, the District Magistrate of Sambhal and other officials.

The case stems from the violence that erupted in Sambhal during a court-ordered survey of the Shahi Jama Masjid in November 2024. The violence led to four deaths and triggered a wider investigation into the incident.

With the Supreme Court imposing a Rs 10 lakh cost on the Uttar Pradesh government and questioning the reliance on the alleged police-custody confession, the case centres on the legal limits governing preventive detention and the material authorities can use to justify such orders.