Supreme Court Stone Pelting Kashmir: Top Court Denies Bail to Separatist Leader Shabir Shah in Terror Funding Case

Key Highlights:

• Supreme Court remarked that stone pelting in Jammu and Kashmir is “not a very ordinary action” while hearing separatist leader Shabir Ahmed Shah’s bail plea in terror funding case​
• Shah has been in custody for 39 years across 24 pending cases, with allegations of receiving funds through hawala transactions to fuel separatist activities in Kashmir​
• NIA registered 105 terror funding cases with 796 accused arrested, significantly reducing stone pelting incidents from 2,653 in 2016 to fewer than 500 by 2019​

Opening Overview

The Supreme Court Stone Pelting Kashmir case took a significant turn on November 10, 2025, when a bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta refused to grant relief to Kashmiri separatist leader Shabir Ahmed Shah, emphasizing that stone pelting in Jammu and Kashmir cannot be treated as an ordinary criminal act. The Supreme Court Stone Pelting Kashmir hearing witnessed strong observations from the bench after Solicitor General Tushar Mehta highlighted newly mentioned facts about Shah’s alleged links with Pakistan-based terror networks.

Shah’s senior advocate Colin Gonsalves argued that his client had been imprisoned for nearly four decades on what he termed a “common charge” of speeches followed by stone pelting, but the court granted the National Investigation Agency three weeks to respond to Shah’s fresh affidavit. This Supreme Court Stone Pelting Kashmir judgment underscores the judiciary’s firm stance on separatist activities that have historically destabilized the region through coordinated violence and terror funding mechanisms.​

The Legal Battle and Bail Rejection

The Supreme Court Stone Pelting Kashmir case centers on Shah’s appeal challenging the Delhi High Court’s June 12, 2025, order that denied him bail in a terror funding case registered by the NIA. Shah was arrested by the NIA on June 4, 2019, in connection with a 2017 case registered against 12 individuals accused of conspiracy for raising and collecting funds to cause disruption through stone pelting, damaging public property, and conspiring to wage war against the Government of India. The Delhi High Court had observed that the possibility of Shah carrying out similar unlawful activities and influencing witnesses could not be ruled out, given the serious nature of the charges.​

During the Supreme Court Stone Pelting Kashmir proceedings, Justice Sandeep Mehta made the crucial observation that “pelting of stones in this state is not a very ordinary action,” distinguishing Kashmir-related stone pelting from common law and order situations. This remark came after Gonsalves contended that Shah had spent 39 years in jail on charges primarily involving speeches followed by stone pelting incidents. The Supreme Court Stone Pelting Kashmir hearing also addressed Shah’s request for copies of detention orders passed against him since 1970, with the bench directing him to approach the newly elected National Conference government in Jammu and Kashmir rather than seeking such relief in bail proceedings.​

The Supreme Court earlier refused to grant interim bail to Shah on September 4, 2025, rejecting pleas made on grounds of his poor health. The top court issued notice to the NIA seeking its response within two weeks on Shah’s plea but made it clear that he would not be enlarged on bail at that stage.​

Shah’s Role in Separatist Movement

The Supreme Court Stone Pelting Kashmir case extensively documented Shah’s alleged “substantial role” in facilitating the separatist movement in Jammu and Kashmir through multiple channels. According to NIA’s prosecution case, Shah, as chairman of the now-banned Jammu and Kashmir Democratic Freedom Party (JKDPF), systematically incited and instigated the general public to engage in sloganeering supporting the secession of Jammu and Kashmir from India. The Supreme Court Stone Pelting Kashmir proceedings revealed that Shah allegedly paid tribute to families of slain terrorists, eulogizing them as “martyrs,” and received money through illegal hawala transactions to fuel subversive activities in the region.​

The Ministry of Home Affairs banned the JKDPF in October 2023 under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act for five years, citing the organization’s links with Pakistan and involvement in fund raising for “unlawful and terrorist activities” prejudicial to India’s integrity, sovereignty, security, and communal harmony. The notification stated that JKDPF and its members had been involved in violent terrorist activities, thereby endangering the security and public order of the state, and showed disrespect to the constitutional authority and sovereignty of India. The Supreme Court Stone Pelting Kashmir case highlighted how Shah allegedly raised funds through Line of Control (LoC) trade, which were then used to finance stone pelters and other forms of violent protests.​

Shah’s criminal history spans decades, with the Delhi High Court examining a detailed table of 24 pending cases against him, indicating his involvement in numerous criminal cases relating to conspiring for the secession of Jammu and Kashmir from the Union of India. The crackdown on Shah began in 2017 when he was first arrested by the Enforcement Directorate in a 2005 money laundering case, with the ED chargesheet accusing him of being in touch with Hafiz Saeed, the founder of terror outfit Jaish-e-Mohammed based in Pakistan. The Supreme Court Stone Pelting Kashmir judgment noted that Shah formed the JKDPF in 1998 after parting ways with the Jammu and Kashmir People’s League.​

Stone Pelting Statistics and NIA’s Counter-Terror Operations

The Supreme Court Stone Pelting Kashmir case occurs against the backdrop of significant data showing the scale of stone pelting incidents in the region and the government’s systematic response through terror funding investigations. According to official data from the Ministry of Home Affairs presented to Rajya Sabha in June 2019, Kashmir witnessed 2,653 stone pelting incidents in 2016, which declined to 1,412 incidents in 2017 and 1,458 incidents in 2018. The year 2016 saw the highest spike with 2,897 stone pelting cases amid widespread protests following the killing of Hizbul Mujahideen militant commander Burhan Wani.​

The National Investigation Agency has played a central role in disrupting terror funding networks that fueled stone pelting and other forms of violence in Jammu and Kashmir, directly relevant to the Supreme Court Stone Pelting Kashmir case. According to official government data, the NIA registered 105 cases related to terror funding, filed 94 chargesheets against 876 accused persons, and arrested 796 individuals in connection with these operations. The government stated that due to NIA’s alertness, financial routes of terrorists have been shut down, with the agency registering numerous cases against overground workers in Jammu and Kashmir and successfully destroying their sleeper cells.​

The Supreme Court Stone Pelting Kashmir proceedings referenced how district-wise data from 2016 showed Baramulla district topping the list with 492 stone pelting incidents, followed by Srinagar and Kupwara with 339 incidents each. North Kashmir recorded the highest regional total with 1,248 incidents, followed by 875 incidents in South Kashmir and 567 in Central Kashmir. The government constituted a Joint Monitoring Committee at the central level and a Multi-Disciplinary Terror Monitoring Group at the state level for sustained action against terror funding, which resulted in a significant decline in stone pelting incidents.​

Constitutional Limits on Freedom of Speech

The Supreme Court Stone Pelting Kashmir case brought into sharp focus the constitutional balance between freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) and reasonable restrictions placed on that right. The Delhi High Court, whose order was upheld by the Supreme Court Stone Pelting Kashmir bench, emphasized that while the Constitution provides for freedom of speech and expression, it also places reasonable restrictions including considerations of public order, decency, morality, or incitement to an offence. The high court stated unequivocally that “this right cannot be misused under the garb of carrying out rallies wherein a person uses inflammatory speeches or instigates the public to commit unlawful activities, detrimental to the interest and integrity of the country”.​

The Supreme Court Stone Pelting Kashmir judgment distinguished between legitimate political dissent and activities that cross the line into waging war against the state. The prosecution alleged that Shah, along with several others, conspired to separate Jammu and Kashmir from India by securing funds through illegal channels, delivering inflammatory speeches to incite violence, funding stone pelters, participating in Hurriyat meetings, and glorifying slain militants as martyrs. These actions, according to the NIA, formed part of a larger conspiracy to wage war against the Indian state and destabilize the region under the guise of a freedom movement.​

The Supreme Court Stone Pelting Kashmir case also addressed the alternate relief sought by Shah for house arrest, which the Delhi High Court rejected given the serious nature of the charges and his position as chairman of an unlawful organization. The courts noted that Shah was involved in multiple criminal cases of a similar nature, all relating to conspiring for the secession of Jammu and Kashmir from the Union of India.

The Supreme Court Stone Pelting Kashmir observations emphasized that in the sensitive context of Jammu and Kashmir, where stone pelting has historically been used as a tool to disrupt public order and create conditions for terrorist activities, such acts cannot be viewed through the same lens as ordinary criminal conduct.​

During the Supreme Court Stone Pelting Kashmir hearing, when Gonsalves argued that his client sought detention orders dating back to 1970, the bench questioned why such a request was being made in bail proceedings rather than through direct application to the government. Justice Mehta pointedly asked, “You ask the government to provide you the details. Why ask in bail proceedings? It’s over 50 years”. This exchange highlighted the court’s view that procedural propriety must be maintained even in cases involving long periods of incarceration.​

Final Perspective

The Supreme Court Stone Pelting Kashmir judgment of November 10, 2025, represents a watershed moment in India’s legal approach to separatist activities and terror funding in Jammu and Kashmir. By refusing to grant relief to Shabir Ahmed Shah and explicitly stating that stone pelting in Kashmir is “not a very ordinary action,” the apex court has drawn a clear distinction between common criminal acts and politically motivated violence designed to destabilize the region. The Supreme Court Stone Pelting Kashmir case demonstrates the judiciary’s recognition that stone pelting in the Valley has historically been intrinsically linked to separatist movements, terror funding networks, and organized attempts to wage war against the Indian state.​

The three-week timeline granted to the NIA to respond to Shah’s fresh affidavit, coupled with the court’s refusal to entertain his request for detention orders in bail proceedings, signals a methodical approach to balancing individual liberty with national security concerns. The Supreme Court Stone Pelting Kashmir observations gain particular significance given the documented evidence of NIA’s success in dismantling terror funding networks, with 105 cases registered, 796 arrests made, and a dramatic reduction in stone pelting incidents from 2,653 in 2016 to significantly lower numbers in subsequent years.

This case underscores that while the Constitution guarantees fundamental rights, these rights cannot be weaponized to undermine the nation’s territorial integrity, a principle that will continue to guide judicial interpretation in cases involving national security and separatist activities in sensitive border regions like Jammu and Kashmir.