BASHARAT RAZAK v. UNION TERRITORY OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR TH SECY HOME AND ORS
CRM(M)/30/2025 · 2026-02-06
Sanjay Parihar
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 813 (JK) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 813 (JK) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Sr. No. 48 HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU
Case:-CRM (M) No. 30/2025 & connected CrlM
Basharat Razak
…. Petitioner(s)/Appellant(s)
Through:- None
V/s
UT of J&K and others
…..Respondent(s)
Through:- Mr. P. D. Singh, Dy. AG
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PARIHAR, JUDGE
ORDER 06.02.2026
There was no representation on behalf of the petitioner on the last date of hearing. Even today, when the matter was taken up, none appeared on behalf of the petitioner. It appears that the petitioner is not interested in pursuing the instant petition. Accordingly, the petition along with connected application(s), is dismissed for want of prosecution. Interim direction, if any, shall stand vacated.
( SANJAY PARIHAR )
JUDGE
JAMMU 06.02.2026 Nikhil