Jammu & Kashmir High Court - Srinagar Bench
Nasir Aslam Wani vs Union Territory Of Jk & Ors on 24 August, 2020
Author: Ali Mohammad Magrey
Bench: Ali Mohammad Magrey
Serial No. 746
After Notice List
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
AT SRINAGAR
(Through Virtual Mode)
WP(Crl) No. 80/2020
Nasir Aslam Wani
..... Petitioner(s)
Through: -
Mr Shariq Jan Reyaz, Advocate.
V/s
Union Territory of JK & Ors.
..... Respondent(s)
Through: -
Mr D. C. Raina, Advocate General with
Mr B. A. Dar, Sr. AAG.
CORAM:
Hon'ble Mr Justice Ali Mohammad Magrey, Judge.
ORDER
24.08.2020 This petition, captioned to be under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has been filed on behalf of one Nasir Aslam Wani S/o Late Bashir Ahmad Wani R/o Rajbagh, Srinagar, through Dr. Farooq Abdullah, President National Conference, with the prayer to direct the respondents to produce the petitioner before this Court and set him at liberty, accordingly.
It is alleged that the petitioner has been unlawfully detained and kept under house arrest at his own residential house since 5 th of August, 2019.
The respondents have filed their response, thereby denying the averments made by the petitioner in his petition. It is stated that the petitioner was neither put under house arrest nor his liberty curbed/ jeopardized.
In view of the contrary/ rival stand taken by the parties before this Court, the learned Advocate General was requested to assist the Court qua the stand of the Government in all these matters.
Today, the learned Advocate General has appeared through Virtual mode alongwith Mr B.A. Dar, learned Senior Additional Advocate General, and has fully supported the stand of the respondents by informing the Court that the petitioner was neither put under house arrest at his residence nor was his liberty curbed/ jeopardized. The learned Advocate General further submits that the petitioner is freely moving around not only in the City of Srinagar, but also in other parts of the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir and that only bald allegations have been made by the petitioner in his petition against the respondents.
Mr Sharik Jan Reyaz, the learned counsel, appearing on behalf of the petitioner, submits that the petitioner was not allowed to move out of his residence since 5th of August, 2020 compelling him to approach this Court through the medium of the instant petition, however, in the recent past, the petitioner has been, now, allowed to move out of his residence. In this backdrop, the learned counsel pleads that the petitioner does not want to press this petition any further. The statement of the learned counsel is taken on record.
On perusal of the response so filed by the Inspector General of Police (IGP), Kashmir, a clear stand has been taken, duly supported by the learned Advocate General, that the petitioner was neither put under house arrest nor his liberty curbed/ jeopardized.
Be that as it may, in view of the statement made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court has no scope for hearing/ deciding the matter on merits and return findings/ observations. In that view of the matter, the instant petition is dismissed as not pressed. Interim directions, if any, subsisting as on date, shall stand vacated.
(Ali Mohammad Magrey) Judge SRINAGAR August 24th, 2020 "TAHIR"
Serial No. 746
After Notice List HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT SRINAGAR (Through Virtual Mode) WP(Crl) No. 82/2020 Shamima Firdous ..... Petitioner(s) Through: -
Mr Shariq Jan Reyaz, Advocate.
V/s Union Territory of JK & Ors.
..... Respondent(s) Through: -
Mr D. C. Raina, Advocate General with Mr B. A. Dar, Sr. AAG.
CORAM:
Hon'ble Mr Justice Ali Mohammad Magrey, Judge.
ORDER 24.08.2020 This petition, captioned to be under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has been filed on behalf of one Shamima Firdous W/o Anees Ahmad R/o Baghat, Barzulla, Srinagar, through Dr. Farooq Abdullah, President National Conference, with the prayer to direct the respondents to produce the petitioner before this Court and set her at liberty, accordingly.
It is alleged that the petitioner has been unlawfully detained and kept under house arrest at her own residential house since 5th of August, 2019.
The respondents have filed their response, thereby denying the averments made by the petitioner in her petition. It is stated that the petitioner was neither put under house arrest nor her liberty curbed/ jeopardized.
In view of the contrary/ rival stand taken by the parties before this Court, the learned Advocate General was requested to assist the Court qua the stand of the Government in all these matters.
Today, the learned Advocate General has appeared through Virtual mode alongwith Mr B.A. Dar, learned Senior Additional Advocate General, and has fully supported the stand of the respondents by informing the Court that the petitioner was neither put under house arrest at his residence nor was his liberty curbed/ jeopardized. The learned Advocate General further submits that the petitioner is freely moving around not only in the City of Srinagar, but also in other parts of the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir and that only bald allegations have been made by the petitioner in his petition against the respondents.
Mr Sharik Jan Reyaz, the learned counsel, appearing on behalf of the petitioner, submits that the petitioner was not allowed to move out of his residence since 5th of August, 2020 compelling her to approach this Court through the medium of the instant petition, however, in the recent past, the petitioner has been, now, allowed to move out of her residence. In this backdrop, the learned counsel pleads that the petitioner does not want to press this petition any further. The statement of the learned counsel is taken on record.
On perusal of the response so filed by the Inspector General of Police (IGP), Kashmir, a clear stand has been taken, duly supported by the learned Advocate General, that the petitioner was neither put under house arrest nor her liberty curbed/ jeopardized.
Be that as it may, in view of the statement made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court has no scope for hearing/ deciding the matter on merits and return findings/ observations. In that view of the matter, the instant petition is dismissed as not pressed. Interim directions, if any, subsisting as on date, shall stand vacated.
(Ali Mohammad Magrey) Judge SRINAGAR August 24th, 2020 "TAHIR"
Serial No. 746
After Notice List HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT SRINAGAR (Through Virtual Mode) WP(Crl) No. 83/2020 Mohammad Shafi Uri ..... Petitioner(s) Through: -
Mr Shariq Jan Reyaz, Advocate.
V/s Union Territory of JK & Ors.
..... Respondent(s) Through: -
Mr D. C. Raina, Advocate General with Mr B. A. Dar, Sr. AAG.
CORAM:
Hon'ble Mr Justice Ali Mohammad Magrey, Judge.
ORDER 24.08.2020 This petition, captioned to be under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has been filed on behalf of one Mohammad Shafi Uri S/o Aumir-ud-Din R/o House No. B-1 Rawalpora, Srinagar, through Omar Abdullah, Vice President National Conference, with the prayer to direct the respondents to produce the petitioner before this Court and set him at liberty, accordingly.
It is alleged that the petitioner has been unlawfully detained and kept under house arrest at his own residential house since 5 th of August, 2019.
The respondents have filed their response, thereby denying the averments made by the petitioner in his petition. It is stated that the petitioner was neither put under house arrest nor his liberty curbed/ jeopardized.
In view of the contrary/ rival stand taken by the parties before this Court, the learned Advocate General was requested to assist the Court qua the stand of the Government in all these matters.
Today, the learned Advocate General has appeared through Virtual mode alongwith Mr B.A. Dar, learned Senior Additional Advocate General, and has fully supported the stand of the respondents by informing the Court that the petitioner was neither put under house arrest at his residence nor was his liberty curbed/ jeopardized. The learned Advocate General further submits that the petitioner is freely moving around not only in the City of Srinagar, but also in other parts of the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir and that only bald allegations have been made by the petitioner in his petition against the respondents.
Mr Sharik Jan Reyaz, the learned counsel, appearing on behalf of the petitioner, submits that the petitioner was not allowed to move out of his residence since 5th of August, 2020 compelling him to approach this Court through the medium of the instant petition, however, in the recent past, the petitioner has been, now, allowed to move out of his residence. In this backdrop, the learned counsel pleads that the petitioner does not want to press this petition any further. The statement of the learned counsel is taken on record.
On perusal of the response so filed by the Inspector General of Police (IGP), Kashmir, a clear stand has been taken, duly supported by the learned Advocate General, that the petitioner was neither put under house arrest nor his liberty curbed/ jeopardized.
Be that as it may, in view of the statement made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court has no scope for hearing/ deciding the matter on merits and return findings/ observations. In that view of the matter, the instant petition is dismissed as not pressed. Interim directions, if any, subsisting as on date, shall stand vacated.
(Ali Mohammad Magrey) Judge SRINAGAR August 24th, 2020 "TAHIR"
Serial No. 746
After Notice List HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT SRINAGAR (Through Virtual Mode) WP(Crl) No. 84/2020 Aga Syed Roohullah ..... Petitioner(s) Through: -
Mr Shariq Jan Reyaz, Advocate.
V/s Union Territory of JK & Ors.
..... Respondent(s) Through: -
Mr D. C. Raina, Advocate General with Mr B. A. Dar, Sr. AAG.
CORAM:
Hon'ble Mr Justice Ali Mohammad Magrey, Judge.
ORDER 24.08.2020 This petition, captioned to be under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has been filed on behalf of one Aga Syed Roohullah S/o Aga Syed Mehdi R/o Karipora, Budgam, through Omar Abdullah, Vice President National Conference, with the prayer to direct the respondents to produce the petitioner before this Court and set him at liberty, accordingly.
It is alleged that the petitioner has been unlawfully detained and kept under house arrest at his own residential house since 5 th of August, 2019.
The respondents have filed their response, thereby denying the averments made by the petitioner in his petition. It is stated that the petitioner was neither put under house arrest nor his liberty curbed/ jeopardized.
In view of the contrary/ rival stand taken by the parties before this Court, the learned Advocate General was requested to assist the Court qua the stand of the Government in all these matters.
Today, the learned Advocate General has appeared through Virtual mode alongwith Mr B. A. Dar, learned Senior Additional Advocate General, and has fully supported the stand of the respondents by informing the Court that the petitioner was neither put under house arrest at his residence nor was his liberty curbed/ jeopardized. The learned Advocate General further submits that the petitioner is freely moving around not only in the City of Srinagar, but also in other parts of the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir and that only bald allegations have been made by the petitioner in his petition against the respondents.
Mr Sharik Jan Reyaz, the learned counsel, appearing on behalf of the petitioner, submits that the petitioner was not allowed to move out of his residence since 5th of August, 2020 compelling him to approach this Court through the medium of the instant petition, however, in the recent past, the petitioner has been, now, allowed to move out of his residence. In this backdrop, the learned counsel pleads that the petitioner does not want to press this petition any further. The statement of the learned counsel is taken on record.
On perusal of the response so filed by the Inspector General of Police (IGP), Kashmir, a clear stand has been taken, duly supported by the learned Advocate General, that the petitioner was neither put under house arrest nor his liberty curbed/ jeopardized.
Be that as it may, in view of the statement made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court has no scope for hearing/ deciding the matter on merits and return findings/ observations. In that view of the matter, the instant petition is dismissed as not pressed. Interim directions, if any, subsisting as on date, shall stand vacated.
(Ali Mohammad Magrey) Judge SRINAGAR August 24th, 2020 "TAHIR"
Serial No. 746
After Notice List HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT SRINAGAR (Through Virtual Mode) WP(Crl) No. 85/2020 Choudhary Mohammad Ramzan ..... Petitioner(s) Through: -
Mr Shariq Jan Reyaz, Advocate.
V/s Union Territory of JK & Ors.
..... Respondent(s) Through: -
Mr D. C. Raina, Advocate General with Mr B. A. Dar, Sr. AAG.
CORAM:
Hon'ble Mr Justice Ali Mohammad Magrey, Judge.
ORDER 24.08.2020 This petition, captioned to be under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has been filed on behalf of one Choudhary Mohammad Ramzan S/o Haji Ghulam Ahmad Choudhary R/o H-7, 4th Lane Friends Enclave Airport Road, Budgam, through Omar Abdullah, Vice President National Conference, with the prayer to direct the respondents to produce the petitioner before this Court and set him at liberty, accordingly.
It is alleged that the petitioner has been unlawfully detained and kept under house arrest at his own residential house since 5 th of August, 2019.
The respondents have filed their response, thereby denying the averments made by the petitioner in his petition. It is stated that the petitioner was neither put under house arrest nor his liberty curbed/ jeopardized.
In view of the contrary/ rival stand taken by the parties before this Court, the learned Advocate General was requested to assist the Court qua the stand of the Government in all these matters.
Today, the learned Advocate General has appeared through Virtual mode alongwith Mr B. A. Dar, learned Senior Additional Advocate General, and has fully supported the stand of the respondents by informing the Court that the petitioner was neither put under house arrest at his residence nor was his liberty curbed/ jeopardized. The learned Advocate General further submits that the petitioner is freely moving around not only in the City of Srinagar, but also in other parts of the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir and that only bald allegations have been made by the petitioner in his petition against the respondents.
Mr Sharik Jan Reyaz, the learned counsel, appearing on behalf of the petitioner, submits that the petitioner was not allowed to move out of his residence since 5th of August, 2020 compelling him to approach this Court through the medium of the instant petition, however, in the recent past, the petitioner has been, now, allowed to move out of his residence. In this backdrop, the learned counsel pleads that the petitioner does not want to press this petition any further. The statement of the learned counsel is taken on record.
On perusal of the response so filed by the Inspector General of Police (IGP), Kashmir, a clear stand has been taken, duly supported by the learned Advocate General, that the petitioner was neither put under house arrest nor his liberty curbed/ jeopardized.
Be that as it may, in view of the statement made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court has no scope for hearing/ deciding the matter on merits and return findings/ observations. In that view of the matter, the instant petition is dismissed as not pressed. Interim directions, if any, subsisting as on date, shall stand vacated.
(Ali Mohammad Magrey) Judge SRINAGAR August 24th, 2020 "TAHIR"
Serial No. 746
After Notice List HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT SRINAGAR (Through Virtual Mode) WP(Crl) No. 86/2020 Mubarak Gull ..... Petitioner(s) Through: -
Mr Shariq Jan Reyaz, Advocate.
V/s Union Territory of JK & Ors.
..... Respondent(s) Through: -
Mr D. C. Raina, Advocate General with Mr B. A. Dar, Sr. AAG.
CORAM:
Hon'ble Mr Justice Ali Mohammad Magrey, Judge.
ORDER 24.08.2020 This petition, captioned to be under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has been filed on behalf of one Mubarak Gull S/o Haji Ghulam Mohammad R/o S-1 Church Lane, Sonwar, Srinagar, through Omar Abdullah, Vice President National Conference, with the prayer to direct the respondents to produce the petitioner before this Court and set him at liberty, accordingly.
It is alleged that the petitioner has been unlawfully detained and kept under house arrest at his own residential house since 5 th of August, 2019.
The respondents have filed their response, thereby denying the averments made by the petitioner in his petition. It is stated that the petitioner was neither put under house arrest nor his liberty curbed/ jeopardized.
In view of the contrary/ rival stand taken by the parties before this Court, the learned Advocate General was requested to assist the Court qua the stand of the Government in all these matters.
Today, the learned Advocate General has appeared through Virtual mode alongwith Mr B. A. Dar, learned Senior Additional Advocate General, and has fully supported the stand of the respondents by informing the Court that the petitioner was neither put under house arrest at his residence nor was his liberty curbed/ jeopardized. The learned Advocate General further submits that the petitioner is freely moving around not only in the City of Srinagar, but also in other parts of the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir and that only bald allegations have been made by the petitioner in his petition against the respondents.
Mr Sharik Jan Reyaz, the learned counsel, appearing on behalf of the petitioner, submits that the petitioner was not allowed to move out of his residence since 5th of August, 2020 compelling him to approach this Court through the medium of the instant petition, however, in the recent past, the petitioner has been, now, allowed to move out of his residence. In this backdrop, the learned counsel pleads that the petitioner does not want to press this petition any further. The statement of the learned counsel is taken on record.
On perusal of the response so filed by the Inspector General of Police (IGP), Kashmir, a clear stand has been taken, duly supported by the learned Advocate General, that the petitioner was neither put under house arrest nor his liberty curbed/ jeopardized.
Be that as it may, in view of the statement made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court has no scope for hearing/ deciding the matter on merits and return findings/ observations. In that view of the matter, the instant petition is dismissed as not pressed. Interim directions, if any, subsisting as on date, shall stand vacated.
(Ali Mohammad Magrey) Judge SRINAGAR August 24th, 2020 "TAHIR"
Serial No. 746
After Notice List HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT SRINAGAR (Through Virtual Mode) WP(Crl) No. 87/2020 Dr. Bashir Ahmad Shah (Veeri) ..... Petitioner(s) Through: -
Mr Shariq Jan Reyaz, Advocate.
V/s Union Territory of JK & Ors.
..... Respondent(s) Through: -
Mr D. C. Raina, Advocate General with Mr B. A. Dar, Sr. AAG.
CORAM:
Hon'ble Mr Justice Ali Mohammad Magrey, Judge.
ORDER 24.08.2020 This petition, captioned to be under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has been filed on behalf of one Dr. Bashir Ahmad Shah (Veeri) S/o Haji Abdul Gani Shah (Veeri) R/o J-48, Jawahar Nagar, Srinagar, through Omar Abdullah, Vice President National Conference, with the prayer to direct the respondents to produce the petitioner before this Court and set him at liberty, accordingly.
It is alleged that the petitioner has been unlawfully detained and kept under house arrest at his own residential house since 5th of August, 2019.
The respondents have filed their response, thereby denying the averments made by the petitioner in his petition. It is stated that the petitioner was neither put under house arrest nor his liberty curbed/ jeopardized.
In view of the contrary/ rival stand taken by the parties before this Court, the learned Advocate General was requested to assist the Court qua the stand of the Government in all these matters.
Today, the learned Advocate General has appeared through Virtual mode alongwith Mr B. A. Dar, learned Senior Additional Advocate General, and has fully supported the stand of the respondents by informing the Court that the petitioner was neither put under house arrest at his residence nor was his liberty curbed/ jeopardized. The learned Advocate General further submits that the petitioner is freely moving around not only in the City of Srinagar, but also in other parts of the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir and that only bald allegations have been made by the petitioner in his petition against the respondents.
Mr Sharik Jan Reyaz, the learned counsel, appearing on behalf of the petitioner, submits that the petitioner was not allowed to move out of his residence since 5th of August, 2020 compelling him to approach this Court through the medium of the instant petition, however, in the recent past, the petitioner has been, now, allowed to move out of his residence. In this backdrop, the learned counsel pleads that the petitioner does not want to press this petition any further. The statement of the learned counsel is taken on record.
On perusal of the response so filed by the Inspector General of Police (IGP), Kashmir, a clear stand has been taken, duly supported by the learned Advocate General, that the petitioner was neither put under house arrest nor his liberty curbed/ jeopardized.
Be that as it may, in view of the statement made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court has no scope for hearing/ deciding the matter on merits and return findings/ observations. In that view of the matter, the instant petition is dismissed as not pressed. Interim directions, if any, subsisting as on date, shall stand vacated.
(Ali Mohammad Magrey) Judge SRINAGAR August 24th, 2020 "TAHIR"
Serial No. 746
After Notice List HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT SRINAGAR (Through Virtual Mode) WP(Crl) No. 88/2020 Abdul Majeed Bhat (Larmi) ..... Petitioner(s) Through: -
Mr Shariq Jan Reyaz, Advocate.
V/s Union Territory of JK & Ors.
..... Respondent(s) Through: -
Mr D. C. Raina, Advocate General with Mr B. A. Dar, Sr. AAG.
CORAM:
Hon'ble Mr Justice Ali Mohammad Magrey, Judge.
ORDER 24.08.2020 This petition, captioned to be under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has been filed on behalf of one Abdul Majeed Bhat (Larmi) S/o Haji Ghulam Mohi-ud-Deen Bhat R/o Laram Bazar Wanpoh, Anantnag, through Omar Abdullah, Vice President National Conference, with the prayer to direct the respondents to produce the petitioner before this Court and set him at liberty, accordingly.
It is alleged that the petitioner has been unlawfully detained and kept under house arrest at his own residential house since 5th of August, 2019.
The respondents have filed their response, thereby denying the averments made by the petitioner in his petition. It is stated that the petitioner was neither put under house arrest nor his liberty curbed/ jeopardized.
In view of the contrary/ rival stand taken by the parties before this Court, the learned Advocate General was requested to assist the Court qua the stand of the Government in all these matters.
Today, the learned Advocate General has appeared through Virtual mode alongwith Mr B. A. Dar, learned Senior Additional Advocate General, and has fully supported the stand of the respondents by informing the Court that the petitioner was neither put under house arrest at his residence nor was his liberty curbed/ jeopardized. The learned Advocate General further submits that the petitioner is freely moving around not only in the City of Srinagar, but also in other parts of the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir and that only bald allegations have been made by the petitioner in his petition against the respondents.
Mr Sharik Jan Reyaz, the learned counsel, appearing on behalf of the petitioner, submits that the petitioner was not allowed to move out of his residence since 5th of August, 2020 compelling him to approach this Court through the medium of the instant petition, however, in the recent past, the petitioner has been, now, allowed to move out of his residence. In this backdrop, the learned counsel pleads that the petitioner does not want to press this petition any further. The statement of the learned counsel is taken on record.
On perusal of the response so filed by the Inspector General of Police (IGP), Kashmir, a clear stand has been taken, duly supported by the learned Advocate General, that the petitioner was neither put under house arrest nor his liberty curbed/ jeopardized.
Be that as it may, in view of the statement made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court has no scope for hearing/ deciding the matter on merits and return findings/ observations. In that view of the matter, the instant petition is dismissed as not pressed. Interim directions, if any, subsisting as on date, shall stand vacated.
(Ali Mohammad Magrey) Judge SRINAGAR August 24th, 2020 "TAHIR"
Serial No. 746
After Notice List HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT SRINAGAR (Through Virtual Mode) WP(Crl) No. 89/2020 Saif U Din Bhat (Shutru) ..... Petitioner(s) Through: -
Mr Shariq Jan Reyaz, Advocate.
V/s Union Territory of JK & Ors.
..... Respondent(s) Through: -
Mr D. C. Raina, Advocate General with Mr B. A. Dar, Sr. AAG.
CORAM:
Hon'ble Mr Justice Ali Mohammad Magrey, Judge.
ORDER 24.08.2020 This petition, captioned to be under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has been filed on behalf of one Saif U Din Bhat (Shutru) S/o Ghulam Mohi-ud-Deen Bhat R/o House No. 6, Rehmat Abad, Hyderpora, Srinagar, through Omar Abdullah, Vice President National Conference, with the prayer to direct the respondents to produce the petitioner before this Court and set him at liberty, accordingly.
It is alleged that the petitioner has been unlawfully detained and kept under house arrest at his own residential house since 5th of August, 2019.
The respondents have filed their response, thereby denying the averments made by the petitioner in his petition. It is stated that the petitioner was neither put under house arrest nor his liberty curbed/ jeopardized.
In view of the contrary/ rival stand taken by the parties before this Court, the learned Advocate General was requested to assist the Court qua the stand of the Government in all these matters.
Today, the learned Advocate General has appeared through Virtual mode alongwith Mr B. A. Dar, learned Senior Additional Advocate General, and has fully supported the stand of the respondents by informing the Court that the petitioner was neither put under house arrest at his residence nor was his liberty curbed/ jeopardized. The learned Advocate General further submits that the petitioner is freely moving around not only in the City of Srinagar, but also in other parts of the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir and that only bald allegations have been made by the petitioner in his petition against the respondents.
Mr Sharik Jan Reyaz, the learned counsel, appearing on behalf of the petitioner, submits that the petitioner was not allowed to move out of his residence since 5th of August, 2020 compelling him to approach this Court through the medium of the instant petition, however, in the recent past, the petitioner has been, now, allowed to move out of his residence. In this backdrop, the learned counsel pleads that the petitioner does not want to press this petition any further. The statement of the learned counsel is taken on record.
On perusal of the response so filed by the Inspector General of Police (IGP), Kashmir, a clear stand has been taken, duly supported by the learned Advocate General, that the petitioner was neither put under house arrest nor his liberty curbed/ jeopardized.
Be that as it may, in view of the statement made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court has no scope for hearing/ deciding the matter on merits and return findings/ observations. In that view of the matter, the instant petition is dismissed as not pressed. Interim directions, if any, subsisting as on date, shall stand vacated.
(Ali Mohammad Magrey) Judge SRINAGAR August 24th, 2020 "TAHIR"
Serial No. 746
After Notice List HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT SRINAGAR (Through Virtual Mode) WP(Crl) No. 91/2020 Basharat Bukhari ..... Petitioner(s) Through: -
Mr Shariq Jan Reyaz, Advocate.
V/s Union Territory of JK & Ors.
..... Respondent(s) Through: -
Mr D. C. Raina, Advocate General with Mr B. A. Dar, Sr. AAG.
CORAM:
Hon'ble Mr Justice Ali Mohammad Magrey, Judge.
ORDER 24.08.2020 This petition, captioned to be under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has been filed on behalf of one Basharat Bukhari S/o Prof. Syed Rafi-ud-Din Bukhari R/o 29 Ryan Enclave, Humhama, Budgam, through Omar Abdullah, Vice President National Conference, with the prayer to direct the respondents to produce the petitioner before this Court and set him at liberty, accordingly.
It is alleged that the petitioner has been unlawfully detained and kept under house arrest at his own residential house since 5 th of August, 2019.
The respondents have filed their response, thereby denying the averments made by the petitioner in his petition. It is stated that the petitioner was neither put under house arrest nor his liberty curbed/ jeopardized.
In view of the contrary/ rival stand taken by the parties before this Court, the learned Advocate General was requested to assist the Court qua the stand of the Government in all these matters.
Today, the learned Advocate General has appeared through Virtual mode alongwith Mr B. A. Dar, learned Senior Additional Advocate General, and has fully supported the stand of the respondents by informing the Court that the petitioner was neither put under house arrest at his residence nor was his liberty curbed/ jeopardized. The learned Advocate General further submits that the petitioner is freely moving around not only in the City of Srinagar, but also in other parts of the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir and that only bald allegations have been made by the petitioner in his petition against the respondents.
Mr Sharik Jan Reyaz, the learned counsel, appearing on behalf of the petitioner, submits that the petitioner was not allowed to move out of his residence since 5th of August, 2020 compelling him to approach this Court through the medium of the instant petition, however, in the recent past, the petitioner has been, now, allowed to move out of his residence. In this backdrop, the learned counsel pleads that the petitioner does not want to press this petition any further. The statement of the learned counsel is taken on record.
On perusal of the response so filed by the Inspector General of Police (IGP), Kashmir, a clear stand has been taken, duly supported by the learned Advocate General, that the petitioner was neither put under house arrest nor his liberty curbed/ jeopardized.
Be that as it may, in view of the statement made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court has no scope for hearing/ deciding the matter on merits and return findings/ observations. In that view of the matter, the instant petition is dismissed as not pressed. Interim directions, if any, subsisting as on date, shall stand vacated.
(Ali Mohammad Magrey) Judge SRINAGAR August 24th, 2020 "TAHIR"
Serial No. 746
After Notice List HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT SRINAGAR (Through Virtual Mode) WP(Crl) No. 92/2020 Mohammad Irfan Shah ..... Petitioner(s) Through: -
Mr Shariq Jan Reyaz, Advocate.
V/s Union Territory of JK & Ors.
..... Respondent(s) Through: -
Mr D. C. Raina, Advocate General with Mr B. A. Dar, Sr. AAG.
CORAM:
Hon'ble Mr Justice Ali Mohammad Magrey, Judge.
ORDER 24.08.2020 This petition, captioned to be under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has been filed on behalf of one Mohammad Irfan Shah S/o Ghulam Mohi-ud-Deen Shah R/o Magarmal Bagh, Batamalloo, Srinagar, through Dr. Farooq Abdullah, President National Conference, with the prayer to direct the respondents to produce the petitioner before this Court and set him at liberty, accordingly.
It is alleged that the petitioner has been unlawfully detained and kept under house arrest at his own residential house since 5th of August, 2019.
The respondents have filed their response, thereby denying the averments made by the petitioner in his petition. It is stated that the petitioner was neither put under house arrest nor his liberty curbed/ jeopardized.
In view of the contrary/ rival stand taken by the parties before this Court, the learned Advocate General was requested to assist the Court qua the stand of the Government in all these matters.
Today, the learned Advocate General has appeared through Virtual mode alongwith Mr B. A. Dar, learned Senior Additional Advocate General, and has fully supported the stand of the respondents by informing the Court that the petitioner was neither put under house arrest at his residence nor was his liberty curbed/ jeopardized. The learned Advocate General further submits that the petitioner is freely moving around not only in the City of Srinagar, but also in other parts of the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir and that only bald allegations have been made by the petitioner in his petition against the respondents.
Mr Sharik Jan Reyaz, the learned counsel, appearing on behalf of the petitioner, submits that the petitioner was not allowed to move out of his residence since 5th of August, 2020 compelling him to approach this Court through the medium of the instant petition, however, in the recent past, the petitioner has been, now, allowed to move out of his residence. In this backdrop, the learned counsel pleads that the petitioner does not want to press this petition any further. The statement of the learned counsel is taken on record.
On perusal of the response so filed by the Inspector General of Police (IGP), Kashmir, a clear stand has been taken, duly supported by the learned Advocate General, that the petitioner was neither put under house arrest nor his liberty curbed/ jeopardized.
Be that as it may, in view of the statement made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court has no scope for hearing/ deciding the matter on merits and return findings/ observations. In that view of the matter, the instant petition is dismissed as not pressed. Interim directions, if any, subsisting as on date, shall stand vacated.
(Ali Mohammad Magrey) Judge SRINAGAR August 24th, 2020 "TAHIR"
Serial No. 746
After Notice List HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT SRINAGAR (Through Virtual Mode) WP(Crl) No. 94/2020 Mohammad Khalil Bandh ..... Petitioner(s) Through: -
Mr Shariq Jan Reyaz, Advocate.
V/s Union Territory of JK & Ors.
..... Respondent(s) Through: -
Mr D. C. Raina, Advocate General with Mr B. A. Dar, Sr. AAG.
CORAM:
Hon'ble Mr Justice Ali Mohammad Magrey, Judge.
ORDER 24.08.2020 This petition, captioned to be under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has been filed on behalf of one Mohammad Khalil Bandh S/o Abdul Gaffar Bandh R/o Govt. Quarter No. T-16, Tulsi Bagh, Srinagar, through Mr. Farooq Abdullah, President National Conference, with the prayer to direct the respondents to produce the petitioner before this Court and set him at liberty, accordingly.
It is alleged that the petitioner has been unlawfully detained and kept under house arrest at his own residential house since 5th of August, 2019.
The respondents have filed their response, thereby denying the averments made by the petitioner in his petition. It is stated that the petitioner was neither put under house arrest nor his liberty curbed/ jeopardized.
In view of the contrary/ rival stand taken by the parties before this Court, the learned Advocate General was requested to assist the Court qua the stand of the Government in all these matters.
Today, the learned Advocate General has appeared through Virtual mode alongwith Mr B. A. Dar, learned Senior Additional Advocate General, and has fully supported the stand of the respondents by informing the Court that the petitioner was neither put under house arrest at his residence nor was his liberty curbed/ jeopardized. The learned Advocate General further submits that the petitioner is freely moving around not only in the City of Srinagar, but also in other parts of the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir and that only bald allegations have been made by the petitioner in his petition against the respondents.
Mr Sharik Jan Reyaz, the learned counsel, appearing on behalf of the petitioner, submits that the petitioner was not allowed to move out of his residence since 5th of August, 2020 compelling him to approach this Court through the medium of the instant petition, however, in the recent past, the petitioner has been, now, allowed to move out of his residence. In this backdrop, the learned counsel pleads that the petitioner does not want to press this petition any further. The statement of the learned counsel is taken on record.
On perusal of the response so filed by the Inspector General of Police (IGP), Kashmir, a clear stand has been taken, duly supported by the learned Advocate General, that the petitioner was neither put under house arrest nor his liberty curbed/ jeopardized.
Be that as it may, in view of the statement made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court has no scope for hearing/ deciding the matter on merits and return findings/ observations. In that view of the matter, the instant petition is dismissed as not pressed. Interim directions, if any, subsisting as on date, shall stand vacated.
(Ali Mohammad Magrey) Judge SRINAGAR August 24th, 2020 "TAHIR"
Serial No. 746
After Notice List HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT SRINAGAR (Through Virtual Mode) WP(Crl) No. 99/2020 Aga Mehmood ..... Petitioner(s) Through: -
Mr Shariq Jan Reyaz, Advocate.
V/s Union Territory of JK & Ors.
..... Respondent(s) Through: -
Mr D. C. Raina, Advocate General with Mr B. A. Dar, Sr. AAG.
CORAM:
Hon'ble Mr Justice Ali Mohammad Magrey, Judge.
ORDER 24.08.2020 This petition, captioned to be under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has been filed on behalf of one Aga Mehmood S/o Aga Syed Yousuf R/o Kari Pora, Budgam, through Dr. Farooq Abdullah, President National Conference, with the prayer to direct the respondents to produce the petitioner before this Court and set him at liberty, accordingly.
It is alleged that the petitioner has been unlawfully detained and kept under house arrest at his own residential house since 5 th of August, 2019.
The respondents have filed their response, thereby denying the averments made by the petitioner in his petition. It is stated that the petitioner was neither put under house arrest nor his liberty curbed/ jeopardized.
In view of the contrary/ rival stand taken by the parties before this Court, the learned Advocate General was requested to assist the Court qua the stand of the Government in all these matters.
Today, the learned Advocate General has appeared through Virtual mode alongwith Mr B. A. Dar, learned Senior Additional Advocate General, and has fully supported the stand of the respondents by informing the Court that the petitioner was neither put under house arrest at his residence nor was his liberty curbed/ jeopardized. The learned Advocate General further submits that the petitioner is freely moving around not only in the City of Srinagar, but also in other parts of the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir and that only bald allegations have been made by the petitioner in his petition against the respondents.
Mr Sharik Jan Reyaz, the learned counsel, appearing on behalf of the petitioner, submits that the petitioner was not allowed to move out of his residence since 5th of August, 2020 compelling him to approach this Court through the medium of the instant petition, however, in the recent past, the petitioner has been, now, allowed to move out of his residence. In this backdrop, the learned counsel pleads that the petitioner does not want to press this petition any further. The statement of the learned counsel is taken on record.
On perusal of the response so filed by the Inspector General of Police (IGP), Kashmir, a clear stand has been taken, duly supported by the learned Advocate General, that the petitioner was neither put under house arrest nor his liberty curbed/ jeopardized.
Be that as it may, in view of the statement made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court has no scope for hearing/ deciding the matter on merits and return findings/ observations. In that view of the matter, the instant petition is dismissed as not pressed. Interim directions, if any, subsisting as on date, shall stand vacated.
(Ali Mohammad Magrey) Judge SRINAGAR August 24th, 2020 "TAHIR"
TAHIR MANZOOR BHAT 2020.08.25 10:51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document