The Supreme Court of India refused to hear a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) demanding a judicial investigation into the April 22 terror attack in Pahalgam, Jammu and Kashmir. The attack resulted in the death of 26 individuals, most of them civilians.
A bench led by Justice Surya Kant, along with Justice N. Kotiswar Singh, criticized the intent behind the PIL, stating that such petitions during an ongoing security crisis could demoralize the armed forces. “You want to demoralise the security forces? We are not going to entertain such petitions,” remarked the court.
Judiciary Has No Investigative Role
Justice Kant firmly reminded petitioners that judges are not trained investigators. He questioned the logic of demanding a judicial inquiry headed by a retired judge, saying, “Judges adjudicate. They do not investigate. Don’t ask us to do that.”
Petitioners Advised
The petition, filed by Mohammad Junaid, Fatesh Kumar Sahu, and Vicky Kumar, was withdrawn following the court’s strong remarks. The bench advised them to raise specific safety concerns, especially regarding Kashmiri students outside the Union Territory, in the appropriate High Courts.
Pahalgam Attack
The April 22 attack was reportedly carried out by The Resistance Front (TRF), believed to be a proxy group of the banned Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT). The militants targeted tourists in the Baisaran Valley, sparking national outrage and security concerns across the region.
The court’s response highlights a broader message—during times of terror threats, national unity and confidence in security forces must be preserved. The bench stressed that unfounded or ill-timed legal actions should not interfere with operational matters of national security.
Read More: Supreme Court, Delhi High Court, States High Court, International
