Jammu and Kashmir High Court
WP(C)/2805/2026 of MEHRAJ MALIK Vs UT OF J AND K TH. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT HOME DEPARTMENT, JAMMU AND OTHERS on 7 September 2026
OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU Case: WP(C) No. 2805/2026 Mehraj Malik …..Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s) Through: Ms. Appu Singh Salathia, Advocate vs U.T. of J&K & Ors. .…. Respondent(s) Through: Ms. Monika Kohli, Sr. AAG Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT JAMMU
Case: WP(C) No. 2805/2026
Mehraj Malik
…..Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s)
Through: Ms. Appu Singh Salathia, Advocate
vs
U.T. of J&K & Ors.
.…. Respondent(s)
Through: Ms. Monika Kohli, Sr. AAG
Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY DHAR, JUDGE
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
07.09.2026
1. Petitioner, through the medium of present petition has sought a direction upon the respondents to restore his security cover, including the escort vehicle.
2. It is contention of the petitioner that he is a member of the Legislative Assembly of the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir and in that connection, he has to travel across various parts of the Union Territory of J&K for political and public engagements. It has been further contended that since 28.04.2026, security cover provided to the petitioner has been reduced without any proper consideration and his escort vehicle has also been withdrawn.
3. According to the petitioner, he has made a number of representations to the respondents to restore his security cover but without any success. Hence, the present petition.
4. Issue notice to the respondents. Ms. Monika Kohli, learned Sr. AAG accepts notice on behalf of the respondents.
5. Having regard to the nature of the grievance that has been projected by the petitioner in the present petition, the same can be disposed of at the threshold itself by issuing appropriate directions to the respondents.
6. Accordingly, the respondents are directed to consider the representations already made by the petitioner in accordance with law and take a decision thereon. The respondents shall place the case of the petitioner before the Serial No. 29
Security Review Coordination Committee (SRCC) to assess the threat perception and thereafter make arrangements for appropriate level of security in his favour, expeditiously, within a period of six weeks from the date a copy of this order is served upon the respondents.
7. The petition, is accordingly, Disposed of.
(SANJAY DHAR)
JUDGE
Jammu 07.09.2026 Suraj K. Singh