Waheed ur Rehman Para Vs UT of J&K [R. No. 175/2023 in FIR 31/2020]
The Srinagar Court denied the PDP Leader Waheed Para’s blanket request to travel outside J&K for one year for Ailing Father’s treatment.
The single judge bench of Sandeep Gandotra, Special Judge Designated Under Nia Act Srinagar noted that the applicant is facing trial in the court in case FIR No. 31/2020 of P/S CIK Srinagar and vide order dated 20-07-2021 charges for offences under Sections 13, 17, 18, 38, 39, 40 of UAP Act and under Sections 120-B, 121, 121-A, 124- A of IPC have been framed against the applicant/accused.
It was further noted by the court that the applicant has been granted bail by the High Court of J & K and Ladakh vide order dated 25-05-2022 subject to conditions that the appellant will make himself available before the investigating officer of the case as and when required to do so and that he will not leave the UT of Jammu and Kashmir without prior permission of the trial court.
By virtue of this application the applicant/accused has sought indulgence of this court in seeking one time permission for a year to travel outside the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir to Mumbai and New Delhi in connection with the routine treatment of his father Ghulam Ahmad Parra who is suffering from serious medical emergency “Metastatic Squamous Cell Carcinoma” Advanced/4th stage on the grounds inter alia mentioned in the application.
APP has filed objections wherein it was stated that the charges against the accused Waheed ur Rehman Para are extremely serious in nature ranging from having close links with foreign/local terrorists, to funding, aiding and supporting the terrorist’s activities or terrorist’s organizations.
The bench noted that there are allegations that the applicant/ accused, has been using the new age technology (VoIP based end to end encrypted messaging applications) in the past to contact with elements within the country and across who are diversely connected with or
suspected to be connected with terrorist/ secessionist networks.
It was observed by the court that the prosecution has genuine apprehensions that not only the trial of the case will be hampered by the absence of accused/ applicant on the dates on which witnesses would appear in this case for recording of their statements, but he will definitely misuse the liberty, if granted, to again try and connect with elements anywhere in India, who are suspected of running terrorist/ secessionist networks.
“On the one hand the applicant had filed application seeking permission to go to USA for three months to attend YALE fellowship knowing fully well that his father is suffering from serious medical emergency “Metastatic Squamous Cell Carcinoma” and when the said application has been dismissed, the applicant has filed this application seeking blanket permission for one year to go to TATA Memorial Center Mumbai for treatment of his ailing father. This clearly shows that the present application has been filed only to prolong the trial of the case”, the court said.
The court dismissed the application being devoid of any merit.