AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The respondent, Additional Director General of Police, CID, J&K, has filed his compliance report pursuant to the previous Court order dated 29.01.2019. In para no.2 thereof, it is stated as under:
"That in pursuance of the directions passed by Hon'ble Court vide order dated 29.01.2019 for issuance of passport in favour of petitioner the matter was re-verified and analysed afresh in light of the guidelines framed for clearness (sic) of passport verification issued by Home Department, J&K vide Circular No.01 of 2014 dated 28.08.2014, which is presently in vogue together with the adverse verification report / inputs against the petitioner already placed before the Hon'ble Court by answering respondent vide compliance report dated 16.07.2018. Also while considering the case of the petitioner, the direction of the Hon'ble Court passed vide order dated 29.12.2017 were adhere with in letter and spirit and on the strength of adverse report / inputs it does not favour the issuance of passport to the petitioner at this stage and same was conveyed to RPO Srinagar accordingly..."
In para 3(a) of his response dated 16.07/2018 the Additional Director General of Police has specifically mentioned as under:
"a) The petitioner namely Aisha Mushtaq, about 12 years of age is presently residing at Ganderpora Eidgah, Srinagar alongwith her mother namely Firdousa W/o Mushtaq Ahmad Zargar @ Mushtaq Latram. The petitioner along with her mother have been permitted twice to visit United Kingdom in the year 2009 and 2015. It has been reliably learnt that during their visits in United Kingdom, they held series of meetings with one Khursheed Ahmad Khan S/o Late Mohammad Sadiq R/o Ganderpora Eidgah, Srinagar, (maternal uncle of petitioner), who had exfiltrated to POK for obtaining illegal arms/ammunition training and still affiliated with militant organization at POK. The visit of the petitioner along with her mother and visit of said Khursheed Ahmad at same time to United Kingdom make the travel and the movement pattern suspicious."
Furthermore, the Government of Jammu and Kashmir in the Home Department has issued consolidated policy/guidelines for clearance of passport verifications in terms of Circular no.01 of 2014 dated 28.08.2014, a photocopy whereof has been placed as annexure with the present compliance report. Guidelines 3, 4 and 10 of the above Circular are quoted hereundere:
"3. A female passport applicant whose father/husband/son has been reported to be involved in militlancy shall be considered for clearance for performing Hajj after due approval of CID Headquarters, J&K. Full clearance shall be considered subject to the clearance given by the Criminal Investifgation Department on case to case basis.
A passport applicant who is a close relative of a militant can also be considered for performing Hajj after clearance by CID Headquarters. Full clearance can be considered on case to case basis subject to the condition he/she does not have any adverse report from the CID."
"10. An applicant whose any close relative(s) had crossed over to PoK/Pak for obtaining arms training, is still there, but does not have any adverse report from the concerned agencies, may be considered for issue of passport clearance provided on the date of the application, his close relative has completed 15 years or more in Pok/Pak."
Considering the compliance report so submitted, the Court is of the opinion that the case of the petitioner stands duly considered pursuant to the judgment of the Court in accordance with the guidclines framed by the Government and on the basis of the inputs received about the petitioner, as quoted above. In that view, the judgment of the Court stands duly complied with.
Having regard to the above, no contempt is made out, therefore, the contempt proceedings are liable to be terminated.
Consequently, the rule framed against the respondents in terms of ROBC no.01/2018 is discharged. The contempt petition no.CPOWP no.40/2018 is, accordingly, dismissed. As regards the two review petitions, being RPOWP no.22/2018 and MP no.0118 filed by the two respondents, nothing remains to be done therein and, therefore, the same are disposed of. The petitioner is left free to seek an appropriate remedy as may be legally available to her