Highway ban: High Court seeks response from J&K govt

The High Court on Friday asked Jammu and Kashmir government to inform it about the implementation of the order issued by divisional commissioner Kashmir with regard to movement of commuters along the Jammu-Srinagar national highway on Sunday and Wednesday every week to facilitate movement of security forces.

 A division bench ofJustice Ali Muhammad Magrey and Justice Tashi Rabstan sought the response aftercounsels representing petitioners told the court that the order issued by thedivisional commissioner is not being implemented on the ground.

   

“Even ambulances carrying patients with terminal diseasesare not allowed to move. Even an officer of the rank of sub divisionalmagistrate has to face the wrath of security forces.  The divisional commissioner’s order hasreduced to a mere shuck,” the counsels said. State’s additional advocate general B A Dar, however, told the courtthat the authorities concerned are adhering to the decisions taken at thedivisional level.  

“Let the learned counsel for the respondents file theirresponse as regards the steps being undertaken to ensure that the decisiontaken at the divisional commissioners’ level is adhered to,” the court said.

The court also sought government response in terms of theorder it (court) passed on 9 April vis-a- vis ensuring the movement ofcommuters in keeping with the divisional commissioner’s order.

Moreover, the court asked Union government as well as Jammuand Kashmir government to file response by April 24 to the pleas seekingdirections to scrap the state government order.

The court was hearing a batch of petitions of former IASofficer-turned-politician Shah Faesal, National Conference leader Ali MuhammadSager, Peoples Democratic Party leader Naeem Akhter, Raja Faisal Zahoor,Shafaqat Nazir and Arif Javid Khan.    

Meanwhile, the state counsel B A Dar accepted notice onbehalf of the state government on an application moved by advocate ShafaqatNazir highlighting how the divisional commissioner’s order is not implementedon ground. 

In his plea advocate Shafqat submitted that due to passingof the impugned order people are suffering. “There is an instance in which an ambulance carrying a patient sufferingfrom terminal disease was stopped by the security forces and which ultimatelyresulted into his death,” Shafqat pleaded, furnishing the relevant documents insupport of his contention. 

He submitted that an officer with the rank of sub divisionalmagistrate was not only prevented by the security forces from discharging hisduty but also manhandled and thrashed. “An FIR was registered in this regard,” he pleaded.   

He further submitted that there are instances where thepersons exempted by the state authorities from highway ban have been stopped bythe forces. 

The Court asked Dar to file response to the application ifany by April 24, the next date of hearing.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

8 + twenty =