news details |
|
|
| Alleged custody death of Rajouri student | | HC directs DC Kishtwar to file report or appear in person | | Et Report
Jammu, Feb 24 : In a petition filed by the father of young boy allegedly killed in police custody (shown as Pakistani Militant) seeking direction to open the grave and the body exhumed and post-mortem be got conducted and also conduct DNA Test, so that identity of the dead-body is fully established, Justice Bansi Lal Bhat of J&K High Court Jammu Wing after hearing Adv SS Ahmed appearing for the petitioner whereas Mohd Saleem GA Vice AAG HA Siddiqui appearing for the state observed that By virtue of order dated November 18, 2013 Deputy Commissioner Kishtwar was directed that while taking a decision he shall keep in the mind of the particular aspect of the matter as to whether DNA profiling is necessary to come to a proper conclusions but counsel for the state has not been able to place on record any material to show that such decision has been taken. Court further observed that the matter is lingering on only on account of inaction on the part of Deputy Commissioner Kishtwar and issued notice to him to report about the decision taken within a period of two weeks failing which he shall appear in person on next date of hearing to explain his position.
In the petition, petitioner submitted that Mustaq Ahmed who was student of 9th class Higher Secondary School Thanamandi in District Rajouri, in the month of June 2002 when he had gone to school, he went missing and despite search his whereabouts could not be traced. A missing report in this regard was registered in Police Station.
After long time, the petitioner came to know through unknown source that the son of the petitioner had joined militant ranks and had become a trained militant. It has also came into the knowledge of the petitioner that Mustaq Ahmed has been apprehended by one Gulam Qadir and his STF team alive and handed over to SSP Doda. On receiving this information, the petitioner immediately rushed to Doda where he met with higher police officers and requested them to allow the petitioner to meet with his son in custody. The officers though admitted the custody of the son of the petitioner but declined to allow the petitioner to meet with his son. On getting the assurance and satisfaction that his son has been apprehended and is in police custody and is safe now. The petitioner went back to his village. JNF |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
