An ex-member of the Jamaat-e-Islami Mehraj Azeem has approached the J&K high court challenging the GoI’s ban on the party, reported the DNA.
Syed Musaib, the counsel for the petitioner said, the high court has issued notices to union government asking them to reply within three weeks.
“The petitioner is challenging an illegal and arbitrary order, wherein a socio-religious and political organisation has been declared to be ‘unlawful association’ with immediate effect without specifying the grounds as is mandated under Section 3(2) of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967,” read the petition.
The grounds and the other particulars on which the notification is issued shall be specified clearly as is mandatory by law, the report mentioned.
“Grounds are not opinions or subsidiary evidence, they should comprise of facts which substantiate the notification, it should include particulars with regards to the dates of the offences, details of the FIR’s registered by the police or the details of the pending prosecution”, the petition said.
Highlighting their contributions, the petitioner revealed that Jamaat’s existence for more than six decades is only for the socio-religious well being of the society.
“The contribution of the Jama’at in the field of education and other such sectors is commendable. The said organisation had contested elections both Parliamentary as well as Assembly and has a registered election symbol,” the report quoted petitioner as saying.
Recently, Mehbooba held a protest against the Jamaat Ban in Anantnag and said that ‘interference in religion will not be tolerated’.
Mufti has vehemently opposed the ban. She recently asked that why is Government of India is so ‘uncomfortable’with the Jamaat-e-Islami.
“While Hindu groups are given ‘carte blanche to spread misinformation & vitiate the atmosphere. But an organization that has worked tirelessly for Kashmiris is banned,” she said in a tweet.
She also pointed out that ‘ideas cannot be banned or jailed, need a better idea to replace it.’
Jamaat, in their statement, termed the imposition of ban on the party as ‘unconstitutional, undemocratic and unethical’.