Latest news with #LadakhHighCourt
Indian Express
02-05-2025
- Politics
- Indian Express
Taken to border for deportation, then given relief by court, J-K policeman and 8 siblings return to Poonch
A Jammu and Kashmir Police constable whose deportation to Pakistan was stayed by the Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court returned with his eight siblings to Poonch Tuesday. Former Salwah Sarpanch Showkat Ahmed told The Indian Express that Iftkhar Ali, 45, and his siblings – all residents of Salwah in Poonch — were brought back from Attari in Punjab and kept at the Jammu district police lines Wednesday night, leaving for Poonch Thursday afternoon. Ali has been serving in the J&K Police for 27 years, and is currently posted at Katra. The development comes a day after the Jammu and Kashmir High Court had stayed the deportation notice sent to the family by the Poonch Deputy Commissioner on April 26 on the back of the central government's orders to suspend visa services and sent back all 'Pakistan residents' except those who held long-term, official or diplomatic visas. By the time the HC stayed the notice, however, authorities had already taken all nine to the Attari border in Punjab. In their petition, Iftikhar Ali and his siblings said that their father Faqur Din was a 'hereditary state subject' and Indian citizen according to the 1955 Citizenship Act. They also said he owned about 17 acres of land and a house at Salwah village. Issued under the Jammu and Kashmir Permanent Resident Certificate (Procedure) Act, 1963, a permanent resident certificate was a document previously issued to prove one's permanent residence in the former state of Jammu and Kashmir. The feature under the special status offered to the state, the certification ceased to exist after the Article 370 in 2019. According to the petition, what put a cloud over their citizenship is that during the 1965 war, Pakistan took over areas along the Line of Control, including the place where Faqur Din and his wife Fatima Bi lived with children, then three. As a result, the family spent years at a camp in Tralkhal in Pakistan-occupied-Kashmir, during which time the couple had six more children. Locals in the area claim Faqur Din and his family returned to Kashmir between the late 1980s and early 1990s. In his order, Justice Rahul Bharti issued a notice to the Union of India and the administration of Jammu and Kasmir and also ordered that the nine petitioners should be forced to leave the UT. The order said that 'prima facie a case is made out' by the revenue papers that their counsel had submitted that they are not Pakistani citizens and asked the deputy commissioner of Poonch to file an affidavit recording details of any property that the petitioners held, either in their own name or in reference to their late father Faqur Din. The case was listed for next hearing on May 20.
Mint
01-05-2025
- Politics
- Mint
Pahalgam attack: J&K High Court stays deportation of Pooch family, including one cop, accused of being Pakistani citizen
The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court on April 29 stayed deportation of four members of a family who were at risk of being deported from India on allegations that they were Pakistani citizens, a Bar and Bench report said on Thursday. The members included a police constable of the Indian Reserve Police (IRP). The central government on April 23 suspended the SAARC Special Visa Exemption Scheme (SVES) and cancelled all visas issued to Pakistani nationals. The government order also directed Pakistani nationals to leave India by April 30. On May 1, the Attari-Wagah border in Amritsar remained open for Pakistani nationals exiting India. These decisions were some of the measures taken by the Union government following a deadly terror attack in Jammu and Kashmir's Pahalgam district which killed 26 civilians on April 22. According to the report, the four petitioners, all from the same family and Poonch residents, said that they too would be forced to leave India on allegations that they were Pakistanis. Denying the allegations, they said that they were bona fide residents of Jammu and Kashmir's Poonch district. The petitioners from village Salwah in Mendhar tehsil of Poonch district, said they had been residing in India for decades and possessed land revenue records dating back to 2014. They claimed that they were being 'wrongfully targetted'. The family had approached the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court after they were detained and faced imminent deportation from India, the Bar and Bench report said. Justice Rahul Bharti observed that there was sufficient material, including revenue documents and police service records, to show that the petitioners were Poonch residents, the report said. The court stayed any move to deport the petitioners from India for the time being, although it added that this direction would be subject to objections from the government's side. "… Petitioners be not asked or forced to leave UT of Jammu & Kashmir. This direction is, however, subject to objections from the other side," the court's order said. Further, the court sought a detailed affidavit from the deputy commissioner of Poonch regarding the petitioners' landholdings and status in their village. The respondent-authorities have been asked to file their replies within two weeks. The matter will be heard next on May 20, 2025. First Published: 1 May 2025, 06:18 PM IST
News18
25-04-2025
- Politics
- News18
Choice Of Partner Constitutional Right, Consent Of Family, Community Not Necessary: HC
Last Updated: 'Consent of family or community or clan is not necessary. Once two adult individuals agree to enter into wedlock, their consent has to be piously given primacy,' the court said Reaffirming individual liberty and constitutional rights, the Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court (HC) recently directed the police to provide protection to a man and woman who got married against their families' wishes and feared retaliation. The court underscored that the choice of a life partner by consenting adults is a manifestation of their choice that is recognised under Articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution. 'Consent of family or community or clan is not necessary. Once two adult individuals agree to enter into wedlock, their consent has to be piously given primacy," the court said. A bench of Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal, while hearing a petition filed by Anamika Devi and her husband, noted that both individuals were majors and had entered into marriage of their own free will on March 26, in accordance with Hindu rites. The couple approached the court citing imminent threats of physical violence and harassment from their relatives due to their inter-familial marriage. Observing that such consensual unions deserve Constitutional protection, the court held that neither family approval nor societal endorsement is necessary once two consenting adults decide to marry. 'The concept of liberty has to be weighed and tested on the touchstone of constitutional sensitivity," Justice Nargal observed, adding that liberty without dignity and choice would reduce the constitutional identity of an individual to mere hollowness. He further stated that 'no one shall be permitted to interfere in the fructification of the said choice", terming any such obstruction a violation of constitutional rights. The court clarified that the current order does not validate the marriage or confirm the petitioners' age or majority. These aspects, it said, are subject to verification as per prevailing legal standards. First Published: April 25, 2025, 16:02 IST
