Kathua cop dismissed for narcotics smuggling in J&K under zero-tolerance drive
Synopsis
A Kathua constable caught with heroin has been dismissed under Rule 335 of J&K Police Rules — the latest in a string of force dismissals tied to drug smuggling in the Union Territory. With five constables already terminated under Article 311 (2024) and a 17-member cross-border ring busted in 2022, the pattern raises hard questions about systemic vulnerability within J&K's police ranks.
Key Takeaways
Selection Grade Constable Aftab Ahmed of Reasi district was dismissed from the Kathua police on 5 August for narcotics smuggling.
He was caught with heroin during a police check and suspended on 8 April for grave misconduct.
The departmental inquiry report, submitted on 27 July , confirmed charges and recommended dismissal.
SSP Mohita Sharma invoked Rule 335 of the J&K Police Rules to order immediate dismissal.
The J&K administration has previously terminated five constables under Article 311 (2024) for narcotics involvement.
In 2022 , five SPOs were arrested in Kupwara and Baramulla as part of a 17-member cross-border drug smuggling ring .
A police constable in Jammu and Kashmir's Kathua district has been dismissed from service following a departmental inquiry that confirmed his involvement in narcotics smuggling, police said on Tuesday, 5 August. The action was taken by Kathua Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP) Mohita Sharma under Rule 335 of the Jammu and Kashmir Police Rules, reinforcing the force's stated zero-tolerance policy against drug-related offences.
Key Developments
Selection Grade Constable Aftab Ahmed, a resident of Reasi district, was apprehended with heroin during a routine checking by a police party. He was placed under suspension on 8 April on charges of grave misconduct and indiscipline. A departmental inquiry was subsequently initiated and entrusted to the Superintendent of Police (Operations), who submitted his findings on 27 July, confirming the charges and recommending dismissal.
An FIR had also been registered against Ahmed under various sections of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act at Billawar police station earlier this year, which formed the basis of the departmental proceedings.
What the Police Said
According to the official police statement, SSP Sharma ordered Ahmed's immediate dismissal 'in order to enforce strict institutional discipline and to serve as an exemplary deterrent to all ranks against any involvement in narcotics-related offences.' The statement described the action as consistent with the force's broader anti-drug mandate across the Union Territory.
A Pattern of Action Against Errant Officers
This dismissal is not an isolated incident. In Udhampur district, a constable was previously terminated after being arrested with contraband heroin under the NDPS Act. Under Article 311 Action (2024), the Jammu and Kashmir administration terminated five police constables found to be deeply involved in unlawful narcotics activities.
In 2022, five Special Police Officers (SPOs) were arrested in Kupwara and Baramulla districts as part of a 17-member cross-border drug smuggling ring operating near the Line of Control. Additionally, SPO Javed Ahmed was disengaged and arrested in Doda district in 2023 after being caught with illegal cannabis.
Why This Matters
Jammu and Kashmir's proximity to drug transit routes — particularly along the Line of Control — has made narcotics infiltration a persistent security and governance challenge. The repeated involvement of law enforcement personnel in drug cases underscores both the scale of the problem and the institutional pressure on the J&K Police to demonstrate accountability. Each dismissal under Rule 335 or Article 311 sends a signal, but critics argue that systemic screening and intelligence-sharing mechanisms need strengthening to prevent recruitment of vulnerable personnel in the first place.
With multiple such cases now on record, the J&K Police's continued use of departmental proceedings as a deterrent will be closely watched by both the administration and civil society.
Point of View
Not preventive ones. The harder question — why personnel with access to sensitive operational information are being recruited into or coerced by drug networks near the Line of Control — remains largely unaddressed in official statements. Until the J&K Police publishes a transparent audit of narcotics-linked personnel cases and the screening gaps they expose, each dismissal risks being seen as damage control rather than systemic reform.
NationPress
5 Aug 2026
Frequently Asked Questions
Why was Kathua constable Aftab Ahmed dismissed from the J&K Police?
Constable Aftab Ahmed was dismissed after being caught with heroin during a police check and subsequently found guilty of narcotics smuggling in a departmental inquiry. SSP Mohita Sharma invoked Rule 335 of the J&K Police Rules to order his immediate dismissal on 5 August.
What is Rule 335 of the Jammu and Kashmir Police Rules?
Rule 335 of the J&K Police Rules empowers a Senior Superintendent of Police to dismiss a police officer from service following a confirmed departmental inquiry. It was invoked in this case to enforce institutional discipline and deter other personnel from drug-related offences.
Has the J&K Police dismissed other officers for narcotics involvement before?
Yes. The J&K administration terminated five constables under Article 311 Action (2024) for deep involvement in narcotics activities. A constable in Udhampur was also terminated after a heroin arrest, and SPO Javed Ahmed was disengaged in Doda in 2023 after being caught with cannabis.
What was the cross-border drug ring linked to J&K police personnel?
In 2022, five Special Police Officers were arrested in Kupwara and Baramulla districts as part of a 17-member cross-border drug smuggling ring operating near the Line of Control, according to police records.
What happens next in the Aftab Ahmed case?
Ahmed has been dismissed from service and faces criminal proceedings under the NDPS Act via an FIR registered at Billawar police station earlier this year. The case will proceed through the courts independently of the now-concluded departmental inquiry.
