Srinagar Court issues show cause notice against Police Officer for terming its order “arbitrary” “violative of fundamental rights”
Mudasir Yaqoob
Srinagar, May 6: Srinagar Court on Monday issued show cause notice against Police Officer for not executing its order and terming Court Order as “arbitrary & violate of fundamental rights” of citizens.
The show cause notice has asked the officer as to why contempt proceedings shall not be initiated against him.
The Court of Forest Magistrate, Srinagar, presided over by Feroz Ahmad Khan said that SHO Police Station Nishat has acted as appellate court rather than executing court order.
“The Officer Incharge of the Police Station has acted as an appellate/ revisional court, by discussing the legality or otherwise of order dated 27.04.2024 and has even reached to the conclusion that order dated 27.04.2024 is not only “indiscriminate” and “arbitrary” but if put into execution would “violate fundamental rights” of the citizens,” Court said.
Court added that at the very outset it is pained to the use of the language and words used by Officer Incharge of Police Station Nishat.
“The (Police) report on its entire cumulative reading gives an impression that order dated 27/4/2024 passed by this Court, wherein the Incharge of police Station Nishat to search the alleged confines and to produce them before this Court has been declared null and void by the concerned SHO, by stating in the report that the warrant issued by this Court if executed would be “indiscriminate” & “arbitrary.”
“Further it has been stated in the report that the execution of warrant issued vide order dated 27/4/2024 would be “violative of the fundamental rights” of the citizens of Ghaziabad.”
Court also observed that the Police Officer in his report presented before Court has termed the minor children as “Objects.”
“Show cause notice is issued to Officer Inchage of Police Station Nishat to show cause as to why proceedings in terms of Section 15 of Contempt of Courts Act be not initiated against him for non-compliance of court order and the language employed by him in his report,” Court said.
The applicant in the case was represented by Advocate Aamir Masoodi.
