HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU WP (C) No. 2519/2026 CM No. 5475/2026 Mohd. Rafeeq …..Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s) Through: Mr. Ch. Nayaz Ahmed Naz, Advocate Vs U.T. of J&K and others .…. Respondent(s) Through: Mr. Raman Sharma, AAG with Ms. Saliqa Sheikh, Assisting Counsel Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE WASIM SADIQ NARGAL, JUDGE ORDER 19.08.2026 1. After arguing for a while, when learned counsel for the petitioner was confronted with the maintainability of the instant petition by Mr. Raman Sharma, learned AAG appearing on behalf of the respondents, on the ground that the petitioner had already preferred a writ petition, registered as WP(C) No. 1893/2026, which came to be dismissed by a Coordinate Bench vide order/judgment dated 17.07.2026, and the petitioner has preferred the instant writ petition by twisting the grounds and making a false statement before the Court, which is not permissible in law. The act of the petitioner in filing the instant petition tantamount to playing fraud with the Court. The learned counsel, when confronted with the same, makes a statement that he may be permitted to withdraw the instant writ petition unconditionally. Sr. No. 173 2 WP (C) No. 2519/2026 CM No. 5475/2026 2. In the light of the statement made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with the warning that the petitioner shall be careful in future as the act of the petitioner, in the instant case of filing the instant petition falls within the realm of abuse of the process of law. 3. The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed as withdrawn, with a warning to the petitioner to be careful in future. (Wasim Sadiq Nargal) Judge Jammu 19.08.2026 Nikhil